
Class. 
Book. 




Ui aAstejfru,tU4<Q- 




TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER FOR THE 
MURDER OF EDWIN DROOD 



KJ AC^wl- 'iiexA-Ky.'. r^X^Jp \ JrvOLA- A^LhAlA^Pu 



Trial 

of 
JOHN JASPER 

FOR THE 

MURDER 

OF 

EDWIN DROOD 

in aid of 

SAMARITAN, 

CHILDREN'S HOMEOPATHIC, 

ST. AGNES and MT. SINAI 

HOSPITALS 

April 29, 1914 



Academy of Music, 
philadelphia, u. s. a. 



PUBLISHED BY THE 

Philadelphia Branch Dickens Fellowship 

John M. Patterson, President and Editor 



H 1 4 ? 



JOs- 



o 



ffitmiJrh SEfcition 



F which Five Hundred numbered and 
registered copies have been printed 



President 




and Editor 



\ '■■■:'' 



©ffirrrs vt tl?r plnlaiirlplria Iranrl) ItrkrttB iFrUiuual?t;t. 1914 




3. Thomas K. ober 
Vice Presidt /// 

5. .1. K. Thompson 
S,, retary 



2. John C Eckel 

Executive Council \. Percival S. Woodin 

/ i< e-Piesident 
1. JOHN M. PATTERSON 

President 6 W. I. Rutter 

Treasure) 



WtCuvrs nf tlir pI1ila^^^tltta $ranrii Sirkrua 3ffrUimislii|i. 1914 




3. Sarah A. Evans 
/ 7i e-Pres ident 



5. John Thomson 

/ i , , /(//. v < ount il (Ex.i. !/".) 



2. John G. Scorer . 

/ , ., , -I. Curtis Wagrer-Sinith 

ttcil 
1. Charles Sessler 
Chairman Executive Council 6. John P. Coughlm 



■ •/{in il 



®abb of (RimtmtB 



PAGE 

List of Patronesses 12 

Program Committee 13 

Dramatis Persona? 14 

Biography of Participants 15 

Introduction 27 

Convening Court and Drawing Jury 40 

Opening Address for Prosecution 54 

Prosecution's Testimony 61 to 93 

Testimony of Canon Crisparkle 63 

Cross-Examination of Canon Crisparkle 67 

Testimony of Neville Landless 71 

Cross-Examination of Neville Landless 73 

Testimony of Rosa Bud 74 

Cross-Examination of Rosa Bud 79 

Testimony of Durdles 80 

Cross-Examination of Durdles 84 

Testimony of Princess Puffer 86 

Cross-Examination of Princess Puffer 89 

Testimony of Grewgious 91 

End of Prosecution's Testimony 93 

Opening Address for Defense 93 

Defendant's Testimony 95 to 118 

Testimony of Mrs. Tope 95 

Cross-Examination of Mrs. Tope 97 

Testimony of Helena Landless 98 

Cross-Examination of Helena Landless 100 

Testimony of Mayor Sapsea 101 

Cross-Examination of Mayor Sapsea 105 

Testimony of John Jasper 107 

Cross-Examination of John Jasper 112 

End of Testimony for Defense 118 

Closing Address of Counsel for Defense 119 

Summing up of Prosecution 126 

Charge of Court 138 

Verdict and Poll of Jury 150 



ICtsi nf 311uatrati0ns 



PAGE 

Frontispiece, Charles Dickens 

Officers of Philadelphia Branch Dickens Fellowship 7 ^ 

Letter from Historical Society 27^ 

Academy of Music 32 ^ 

Some of the Veniremen 42 v/ 

John C. Bell 54 ^ 

John R. K. Scott, Wilmer Krusen, John M. Patterson 67 v 

Miss de Mercier and Mrs. Lippincott 86 v 

Miss Evans 95 v 

Joseph P. Rogers 101 v 

Trial Scene 106 «/ 

John P. Coughlin 112 </ 

William L. Tilden and A. G. Hetherington 119 • 

Judge Elkin 138 ^ 

The Wheeler Brothers 150 v 



Mnttm &xmt 



John P. Elkin, October 3, 1915 
Sarah A. Evans, December 29, 1915 
George W. Kendrick, February 26, 1916 
James W. King, February 24, 1915 
J. Parker Norris, March 17, 1916 
John Thomson, February 23, 1916 
William T. Tilden, July 29, 1915 
J. William White, April 24, 1916 



Jlatnmefififa 



Mrs. J. Parker Norris, Jr., Chairman 



Audenreid, Mrs. Charles Y. 
Barratt, Mrs. Norris S. 
Bell, Mrs. John C. 
Blankenburg, Mrs. Rudolph 
Brown, Mrs. William Findlay 
Bullock, Mrs. J. Maxwell 
Burpee, Mrs. G. H. 
Carson, Mrs. Hampton L. 
Cochrane, Mrs. Travis 
Coughlin, Mrs. John P. 
Crawford, Mrs. Andrew W. 
Dixon, Mrs. George Dallas 
Donoghue, Mrs. Daniel C. 
Douglas, Mrs. Walter deC. 
Earle, Mrs. George H., Jr. 
Eckel, Mrs. John C. 
Elkin, Mrs. John P. 
Ellison, Mrs. Wm. R. 
Foster, Mrs. Thomas C. 
Fraley, Mrs. Frederick 
Geiger, Mrs. Mary S. 
George, Mrs. William H. 
Gummey, Mrs. Charles F. 
Haggarty, Mrs. Cornelius 
Hanson, Mrs. M. F. 
Hetherington, Mrs. A. G. 
Kane, Mrs. John Kent 
Kendrick, Mrs. Murdock 
Knowles, Mrs. Wm. Gray 
Krusen, Mrs. Wilmer 
Lewis, Mrs. John F. 

Zackey, 



Lit, Mrs. Samuel D. 
Lovett, Mrs. Henry 
Martin, Mrs. J. Willis 
McMichael, Mrs. Charles B. 
Murphy, Mrs. Thos. E. 
Ober, Mrs. Thomas K. 
Patterson, Mrs. John M. 
Peddie, Mrs. Mary H. 
Pedrick, Mrs. Washington F. 
Pusey, Mrs. Frederick T. 
Ridgway, Mrs. Thomas 
Rogers, Mrs. Joseph P. 
Schoff, Mrs. Frederick 
Scorer, Mrs. John G. 
Scott, Mrs. John R. K. 
Selig, Mrs. S. 
Sessler, Mrs. Charles 
Sipler, Miss Martha H. 
Smith, Mrs. Frank 
Smith, Miss A. Walker 
Sullivan, Mrs. Jas. F. 
Tener, Mrs. John K. 
Thompson, Mrs. J. K. 
Tower, Mrs. Charlemagne 
Vare, Mrs. Edwin H. 
Voorhees, Mrs. Theodore 
Wager-Smith, Miss Curtis 
Wentz, Mrs. Caroline Hance 
Whelen, Mrs. Wm. B. 
Woodin, Mrs. Percival S. 
Wurtz, Mrs. Chas. Stewart 
Miss Helen M. 



Jn (EJjarge of Programs 



Mrs. John C. 

Miss Esther Bach 
Miss Catharine Brady 
Miss Violet Chadwick 
Miss Edna Diernbach 
Mrs. Charles Drake 
Miss Jane Ewing 
Mrs. H. J. Fraley 
Mrs. Arthur Goldsmith 



Eckel, Chairman 

Miss Mae Loftus 
Miss Margaret Lukes 
Miss Gertrude Lukes 
Miss Clare Mulholland 
Miss Ardis Tanguay 
Miss Eleanor Woodward 
Miss Louise Woodward 



3lj? ©rial Qlourt 



The Judge 
Supreme Court Justice John P. Elkin 

For the Prosecution 

John C. Bell 

Attorney General of Pennsylvania 

John M. Patterson 
Judge of Common Pleas No. 1 

For the Defence 

John R. K. Scott 

Congressman at Large from Pennsylvania 

Percival S. Woodin 

Court Officer Ralph Bingham 

Court Clerk Henry F. Walton 

Court Cryer Levi Hart 

j' Arthur L. Wheeler 
Tipstaves j Walter S. Wheeler 

Court Stenographer Ernest N. Ross 

Stage Director John G. Eckel 

Assistant Stage Director Charles Sessler 

Stage Manager Frank M. Rainger 



(Utjararta-0 in tJje l&aak 

John Jasper John P. Coughlin 

Canon Crisparkle Dr. Wilmer Krusen 

Durdles John G. Scorer 

S apsea Joseph P. Rogers 

Grewgious John Kent Kane 

Neville Landless Paxon T. Deeter 

Rosa Bud Winifred De Mercier-Panton 

Helena Landless Mrs. J. Howard Reber 

Mrs. Tope Miss Sarah A. Evans 

Princess Puffer Miriam Lee Earley Lippincott 



SuigrapJjg of JJarttnpanta 



In accordance with well recognized rules of gallantry, 
the editor has refrained from giving the ages of the ladies 
who took part in the trial. Suffice it to say that they 
were all young, charming and clever. 

Miss Evans was a public educator in Philadelphia. 

Miss De Mercier-Panton is serving as a Red Cross nurse 
with the Allies during the present war. 

Mrs. A. Haines Lippincott is the wife of a well-known 
physician. 

Mrs. J. Howard Reber is the wife of a prominent Phila- 
delphia lawyer. 



Baldi, C. C. A. 

Born in Italy, December 2, 1862. Chevalier of the Crown 
of Italy. Banker, publisher and merchant. 

Bell, John Cromwell, A.M., LL.B., LL.D. 

Born at Elders Ridge, Pa., October 3, 1861. Graduated 
with honors, Law School, University of Pennsylvania, 
1884; District Attorney of Philadelphia, 1903-1907; At- 
torney General of Pennsylvania, 1911-1915. Author: 
"Several Modes of Instituting Criminal Proceedings," 
"Public Service Law of Pennsylvania," etc. Has degree of 
LL.D. from Temple University, and is Trustee of the Uni- 
versity of Pennsylvania. 

Bingham, Ralph. 

Born at Richmond, Va., August 2, 1870. Educated pub- 
lic schools and private tutelage; (honorary A.B., Villa- 
nova College, Pennsylvania, 1906). Humorist. Founder 
and ex-President International Lyceum Association of 
America. Author several short plays, contributor humor- 
ous articles to magazines and newspapers. 

Blankenburg, Rudolph. 

Born in Barntrup, Lippe Detmold, Germany, February 
16, 1843. Manufacturer and importer. LL.D., Lafayette, 
Ursinus and Dartmouth. Author of many articles in mag- 
azines. Mayor of Philadelphia, 1912-1915. 

15 



BIOGRAPHY OF PARTICIPANTS 

Brown, William Findlay. 

Born in Philadelphia, July 23, 1861. Graduate of Lafa- 
yette College, 1880; Ph.B., Harvard M. S. Admitted to 
the Bar in 1892; First Assistant District Attorney of 
Philadelphia, 1908. Compiler of Brown's Digest of Laws 
and Ordinances of Philadelphia. 

Brumbaugh, Martin Grove. 

Born in Huntingdon County, Pa., April 14, 1862. B.E., 
Juniata College; M.E., B.S., M.A., Ph.D., University of 
Pennsylvania; LL.D., Mt. Morris, Franklin and Marshall, 
University of Pennsylvania; Litt.D., Lafayette; Superin- 
tendent of Public Schools, Huntingdon County, 1884-90; 
Professor Pedagoerv, University of Pennsylvania, 1895-1900, 
1902-06; First Cornr. Ed., Porto Rico, 1900-02; Superinten- 
dent Public Schools, Philadelphia County, 1906-15. Elected 
Governor of Pennsylvania, November 3, 1914. Author : 
History of Brethren, Standard Readers, Life and Works of 
Christopher Dock, etc. 

Budd, Henry. 

Born in Philadelphia, November 12, 1849. A.B., A.M., 
University of Pennsylvania. Lawyer. Author of St. 
Mary's Hall Lectures; Leading Cases in American Law of 
Real Property; Index Digest Weekly Notes of Cases. 

Carr, William A. 

Born in Farmington, la., September 28, 1869. Graduate 
of Law Department, University of Pennsylvania. Admitted 
to the Bar, 1894. Twice candidate for Congress, Sixth 
Pennsylvania District. In general practice of law. 

Carstairs, J. H. 

Born in Philadelphia, August 7, 1863. Actively engaged 
in various lines of business. 

Chandler, Frederick T. 

Born Hanoverton, Chester County, December 5> 1863. 
Educated in the public schools. Banker and broker; 
President of the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, 1906-07. 

Coughlin, John P. 

Born in Philadelphia, February 1, 1870. Graduated 
from La Salle College, Philadelphia. Admitted to the Bar 
in 1897. 

Da Costa, J. Chalmers. 

Born in Washington, D. C, November 15, 1863. M. D., 
LL.D., Samuel D. Gross Professor of Surgery in the Jef- 
ferson Medical College; Attending Surgeon to the Jefferson 
Medical College Hospital; Consulting Surgeon to St. 
Joseph's Hospital. Author of "Manual of Modern Sur- 
gery"; Editor of "American Edition of Gray's Anatomy." 

16 



BIOGRAPHY OF PARTICIPANTS 

Daly, Thomas A. 

Born in Philadelphia, May 28, 1871. A.M., Fordham 
University, 1901; Litt.D., Fordham University, 1910. Poet- 
humorist, "Evening Ledger." Author: "Canzoni," "Car- 
mina," "Madrigali," "Little Polly's Pomes," "Songs of 
Wedlock." 

Deeter, Paxson. 

Born in Reading, Pa., December 23, 1880. B.S., 1903, and 
LL.B., 1906, University of Pennsylvania. Member of the 
Philadelphia Bar 

Eckel, John C. &$ 

Born in New York, August 18, 18S6, but spent his early 
days in Illinois, where he taught school and was admitted to 
the bar. Entered the newspaper business in 1885. Has been 
city editor and managing editor of several Chicago dailies. 
Also held executive positions on W. R. Hearst's publica- 
tions in New York. Joined the "North American" staff 
in January, 1901, on which paper he has been night editor 
since 1904. Under authority from the London parent 
body he became the founder of the Philadelphia Branch 
of the Dickens's Fellowship in 1906. He was its first presi- 
dent. In 1913 he published a Bibliography of Dickens's 
First Editions. 

Elk ins, George W. 

Born in Philadelphia, September 26, 1858. Educated in 
public and private schools. Officer and Director of many 
corporations. Also identified with numerous charitable 
institutions. 

Elkin, John P. 

Born in West Mahoney Township, Indiana County, 
Pennsylvania, January 11, 1860. Early education received 
in the public schools of the country. Graduated from 
Indiana Normal School, became a teacher, entered Law 
Department of the University of Michigan in 1882, grad- 
uated 1884. Admitted to the Bar in 1885. One year before 
his admission he was elected to the Legislature, and in 1886 
was returned by an increased majority. In 1895 he was 
appointed Deputy Attorney-General, and four years later 
Governor Stone appointed him Attorney-General. In 1904 
he was nominated as one of the Justices of the Supreme 
Court of Pennsylvania. 

Ellison, William Rodman. 

Born in Philadelphia, April 11, 1856. Educated at the 
Protestant Episcopal Academy of Philadelphia, and at 
Geneva, Switzerland. Merchant 

17 



BIOGRAPHY OF PARTICIPANTS 

Folwell, Nathan T. 

Born in Philadelphia, March 21, 1847. Manufacturer 
and dealer in textiles. President of the Manufacturers' 
Club. Author of pamphlet on "Protection of American 
Industries." 

Gest, John Marshall. 

Born at Philadelphia, March 17, 1859. A.B., 1879; A.M. 
and LL.B., 1882, University of Pennsylvania. Admitted 
to the Philadelphia Bar, April 1, 1882. Judge of the Or- 
phans' Court since 1911. In 1909 published "Practical 
Suggestions for Drawing Wills, &c, in Pennsylvania." 
In 1913 "The Lawyer in Literature" and numerous papers 
in legal magazines. 

Gribbel, John. 

Born in Hoboken, N. J., March 29, 1858. A.M., Wesleyan 
University. Publisher; Officer and Director in various cor- 
porations. Elected President of the Union League in 1914. 

Hanson, M. F. 

Born in Philadelphia, February 16, 1867. Connected with 
the "Philadelphia Record" for twenty-six years. 

Harrison, Charles Custis. 

Born in Philadelphia, May 3, 1844. Educated at the 
Academy of the Protestant Episcopal Church, Philadel- 
phia; A.B., 1862, and A.M., 1865, University of Pennsyl- 
vania; LL.D,, Columbia University, 1895; Princeton, 1896; 
Yale, 1901; University of Pennsylvania, 1911. Provost of 
the University of Pennsylvania, 1894-1911. President of 
the Municipal Art Jury of Philadelphia. Publisher of 
Provost's Reports, 1895-1908. 

Hart, Levi. 

Born February 5, 1851, at Chestnut Hill, Philadelphia. 
Educated in the public schools, and Bryant and Stratton's 
College. Member of the Twenty-first Sectional School 
Board for twenty-three years. Member of Common Council. 
Cryer of the Court of Oyer and Terminer and Quarter 
Sessions of the Peace of Philadelphia County for twenty- 
five years. Compiled forms used in the Court of Oyer and 
Terminer in the trial of Murder Cases. 

Hetherington, Albert Gallatin. 

Born in Clarion, Pa., April 11, 1852. A graduate of 
Bucknell University. Has taken an active interest in 
artistic and literary life in Philadelphia. Director Educa- 
tion and Art to Pennsylvania Panama Commission. 

18 



BIOGRAPHY OF PARTICIPANTS 

Huneker, John F. 

Born at Philadelphia, October 29, 1851. Educated Roth's 
Academy, Philadelphia. Shipped to sea in his early 20's, 
and saw considerable of the world, and later called to take 
up his father's business and subsequently became Presi- 
dent of the Chapman Decorative Company. Always took 
interest in sport and became active in the Schuylkill Navy 
in both rowing and official work, representing the Malta 
Boat Club, on the Schuylkill Navy Board for many years, 
and was Vice-Commodore, 1881-82, also represented Phila- 
delphia on the national Executive Committee of Amateur 
Rowing. Was one of the founders of the Athletic Club 
of the Schuylkill Navy, in 1884, and Captain of that Club 
for several years, during part of its successful athletic 
career. Contributed several times to papers and maga- 
zines on amateur sport. 

Jastrow, Morris, Jr. 

Born in Warsaw, Poland, August 13, 1861. Educated 
at private schools, 1877, and the University of Pennsyl- 
vania. B.A., 1881, University of Pennsylvania; Ph.D., 1884, 
University of Leipzig; LL.D., 1914, University of Pennsyl- 
vania. Professor of Semitic Languages and Librarian at 
the University of Pennsylvania. Publisher of "Religion 
of Babylonia and Assyria"; "Study of Religion"; Religion 
Babyloniens und Assyriens (German) ; Aspects of Reli- 
gious Belief and Practice in Babylonia and Assyria; He- 
brew and Babylonian Traditions; Babylonian and Assyrian 
Birth-omens and their Cultural Significance; Civilization 
of Babylonia and Assyria. 

Johnson, Alba B. 

Born in Pittsburgh, Pa., February 8, 1858. Educated at 
the public schools and Central High. LL.D., Ursinus Col- 
lege. Director of many corporations and President of the 
Baldwin Locomotive Works. 

Kane, John Kent. 

Born in Wilmington, Del., September 3, 1873. Graduated 
from Harvard in 1893; University of Pennsylvania 
(Law), 1897. Admitted to the Bar in 1897. 

Kavanagh, Rt. Rev. Monsgr. Charles F. 

Born in Philadelphia, 1867, educated in Public Schools 
and in La Salle College, Philadelphia. Entered St. Charles' 
Seminary, Overbrook, September 2, 1887, ordained to the 
Priesthood June 12, 1897. Catholic University, Washington, 
1897-1898. Assistant Priest, St. Vincent's, Minersville; 
Holy Family, Manyunk; St. Francis Xavier, Philadelphia 
and the Cathedral; Secretary of Diocese of Philadelphia, 
1906-1911; Chancellor, 1911-1914. Rector of St. Stephen's, 
Port Carbon and St. Katharine's, Wayne, Pa. Master of 

19 



BIOGRAPHY OF PARTICIPANTS 

Arts, La Salle College; Bachelor of Theology, Catholic 
University, Washington. Made Domestic Prelate, with the 
Title of Monsignor by His Holiness, Pope Pius X on the 
3d day of February, 1912. 

Kendrick, George W., Jr. 

Born Philadelphia, July 31, 1841. Educated in public 
schools; graduated from Central High School, 1858; mem- 
ber of Board of City Trusts; banker and director of many 
corporations. 

King, James W. 

Born in Philadelphia, October 5, 1858; died February 24, 
1915; educated in Philadelphia, graduating from High 
School. City Editor and Managing Editor of "The Press" 
for a number of years. Admitted to Philadelphia Bar; ap- 
pointed by Governor Tener a member of the Pennsylvania 
Panama-Pacific Commission and acted as its Counsel; 
member of the Executive Committee of Archbishop Ryan's 
Silver Jubilee; received an honorary degree from Lafay- 
ette College. 

Krusen, Wilmer. 

Born in Bucks County, May 18, 1869. M.D., Jefferson 
Medical College, 1893; Instructor at Jefferson Medical 
College 1894; Vice-President and Professor of Gynecology 
at Temple University; Director of Health and Charities of 
the City of Philadelphia; Fellow of the College of Phy- 
sicians of Philadelphia; Fellow of American College of 
Surgeons. 

Lewis, Francis A. 

.born in Philadelphia, October 1, 1857. B.A., LL.B., M.A., 
University of Pennsylvania. Attorney-at-Law retired. 
Director of many corporations. Editor Smith's Leading 
Cases, Law of the Stock Exchange; author of many pam- 
phlets, chiefly on Ecclesiastical Subjects. 

Long, John Luther. 

Born in Philadelphia, 1861. Admitted to Philadelphia 
Bar. Author of Madame Butterfly (1898), The Fox 
Woman (1900), The Prince of Illusion (1901), Naughty 
Nan, The Dragon Fly (1905), Billy Boy, The Way of the 
Gods (1906), and, in collaboration with David Belasco, The 
Darling of the Gods (1902). 

Lovett, Henry. 

Born in Langhorne, Pa., December 5, 1865. M.D., Jeffer- 
son Medical College, 1888. President of Peoples National 
Bank, and of the Langhorne Spring Water Company. 

McFadden, John H. 

Born in Philadelphia, Dec. 3, 1850. Educated in the 
Episcopal Academy. Graduated in 1868. Well known in 
art, scientific and commercial circles throughout the world. 

20 



BIOGRAPHY OF PARTICIPANTS 

McMaster, John Bach. 

Born in Brooklyn, N. Y., June 29, 1852. Graduate Col- 
lege of the City of New York, 1870. Litt.D., University of 
Pennsylvania, 1894; LL.D, Washington and Jefferson 
College, 1901 ; LL.D., University of Toronto, 1907. Author 
1883-1913, A History of the People of the United States, 
8 vols.; 1887, Benjamin Franklin as a Man of Let- 
ters; 1902, Daniel Webster; 1896, With Its Fathers; 
Sketches in American History; Origin, Meaning and Ap- 
plication of the Monroe Doctrine; 1897, School History of 
the United States; 1901, A Primary History of the United 
States; 1903, Chapters IX, XI and XII, in Vol. 7, Cam- 
bridge Modern History; 1903, Social, Industrial and Politi- 
cal Rights of Man in America. 

Miller, Charles R. 

Born in Chester County, Pennsylvania, September 30, 
1857. B.L. Swarthmore College, 1879, LL.B. University 
of Pennsylvania, 1881. Admitted to the Philadelphia Bar, 
1881. Governor of Delaware, term 1913-17. 

Miller, Leslie W. 

Born in Battleboro, Vt., August 5, 1848. Educated at the 
Massachusetts Normal Art School and Boston Museum of 
Fine Arts. Principal since 1880 of the Pennsylvania 
Museum and School of Industrial Art. Lecturer on Art at 
Swarthmore College. Author of "Essentials of Perspective" 
and many lectures and addresses on Art and Education. 

Murphy, Thomas Edward. 

Born in Louisville, N. Y., July 18, 1859. Educated in the 
public schools of Portland, Maine; attended the Union Law 
School of Chicago; completed his legal education with Mr. 
W. Horace Rose, of Johnstown, Pa. Admitted to the Bar 
in Johnstown, Pa. Appointed by Governor Tener Aide-de- 
Camp, iStaff Commander-in-Chief, January, 1911, with the 
rank of Lieutenant Colonel; re-appointed by Governor 
Brumbaugh in January, 1915. 

Norris, J. Parker. 

Born in Philadelphia, November 3, 1847. Educated in 
private schools in this city and graduated from University 
of Pennsylvania with the degree of A.B. Admitted to the 
Philadelphia Bar, March, 1870. Shakespearean authority 
and author cf several books on Shakespeare. Has a large 
collection of Shakespeareana which is the result of years 
of research work. 

Ober, Thomas Kerr. 

Born at West Troy, N. Y., January 17, 1837. Educated 
in public and private schools. Business man. 

21 



BIOGRAPHY OF PARTICIPANTS 

Qberholtzer, Ellis Paxson. 

Born in Chester County, Pa., in 1868. A.B., Ph.D., Uni- 
versity of Pennsylvania. Editor, historian, Master of 
Pageants. Author of "The Referendum in America"; 
"Robert Morris, Patriot and Financier" ; Abraham Lincoln ; 
Henry Clay; The Literary History of Philadelphia; Jay 
Cooke, Financier of the Civil War (2 vols.) ; Philadelphia, 
a history of the City and Its People (4 vols.). Editor 
"American Crisis Biographies" (20 vols.). 

Patterson, John M. 

Born in Philadelphia, March 4, 1874. Educated in the 
public schools; graduated from Law Department, Uni- 
versity of Pennsylvania, 1896. Author of "Lawyers of 
Dickens' Land"; "Dickens and Christmas," and several 
legal essays published in the American Law Register; the 
Green Bag and Chicago Law Journal. Trustee of Temple 
University, Garretson Hospital, Samaritan Hospital; Direc- 
tor of Maternity Hospital. Served with the First Penn- 
sylvania Volunteers during the Spanish-American War 
from May 11, 1898, to October 15, 1898. Appointed 
Assistant City Solicitor April, 1902; Assistant District 
Attorney November, 1904; elected to the Common Pleas 
bench of Philadelphia County in 1913. 

Pennypacker, Samuel W. 

Born in Phoenixville, Pa., April 9, 1843. LL.B., Univer- 
sity of Pennsylvania; LL.D., University of Pennsylvania, 
Franklin and Marshall College, Mulhenberg College. 
Veteran of the Civil War; member of the Board of 
Public Education; President of the Law Academy; 
Judge Common Pleas Court of Philadelphia County, 1889; 
President Judge, 1896; Governor of the State of Pennsyl- 
vania, 1903; Trustee of the University of Pennsylvania; 
President of many societies. Author Digest of the English 
Common Law Reports, Pennsylvania Colonial Cases, 4 vols, 
of Pennypacker's Supreme Court Reports, 45 vols., Weekly 
Notes of Cases; Annals of Phoenixville; Historical and 
Biographical Sketches; Settlement of Germantown; Penn- 
sylvania in American History, etc. 

Pepper, George Wharton. 

Born in Philadelphia, March 16, 1867. A.B., University 
of Pennsylvania, 1887; LL.B., 1889; admitted to the Bar, 
1889; LL.D., University of Pennsylvania, 1907; D.C.L., 
University of the South, 1908; LL.D., Yale, 1914; Algernon 
Sydney Biddle Professor of Law, University of Pennsyl- 
vania, 1893-1910; Trustee of University of Pennsylvania; 
Lyman Beecher Lecturer for 1915 in Yale University; 
Trustee of the Carnegie Institution. Author of the Border- 
land of Federal and State Decisions, 1889; Pleading at 
Common Law and Under the Codes, 1891 ; Digest of the 
Laws of Pennsylvania, 1700-1901; Digest of Decisions and 

22 



BIOGRAPHY OF PARTICIPANTS 

Encyclopaedia of Pennsylvania Law, 1754-1898; The 
Way, 1909; A Voice From the Crowd, 1915. 

Rogers, Joseph P. 

Born in Tamaqua, Pa., March 17, 1876. Admitted to 
the Philadelphia Bar in 1899; appointed Assistant City 
Solicitor in 1901; Assistant District Attorney, 1911; elected 
to the Common Pleas Bench of Philadelphia County, 1915. 

Rosenbach, A. S. W. 

Born in Philadelphia, July 22, 1876; B.S., University of 
Pennsylvania, 1898; Ph.D., 1901; Secretary of The Rosen- 
bach Company; Collaborator with Austin Dobson of Dr. 
Johnson's Prologue Spoken at the Opening of the Theatre 
in Drury Lane, in 1898; compiler of the Catalogues of 
the Works of Robert Louis Stevenson in the collection of 
the late H. E. Widener, 1913, etc., etc. 

Ross, Ernest N. 

Born in Prescott, Arizona, October 26, 1878. Educated 
in the Philadelphia public schools, Drexel Institute, Tem- 
ple University and under private tutelage. Admitted to 
the Philadelphia Bar, 1893. Official Stenographer, Common 
Pleas Court, Philadelphia County, since 1897. Author of 
text-book, "Scenario Writing." 

Rotan, Samuel P. 

Born in Philadelphia, January 9, 1869. A.B., A.M., 
Central High School; LL.B., University of Pennsylvania. 
Admitted to the Bar in 1892; District Attorney of Phila- 
delphia since 1907. Author, in conjunction with Judge 
Patterson, of "Rights and Duties of Magistrates." 

Ryan, James J. 

Born in Ireland in 1848; came to the United States in 
1869; general contractor, retired in 1910. Philanthropist; 
member of the Board of Inspectors of Philadelphia County 
Prisons. Knight of Saint Gregory. 1907, and Knight of 
the Grand Cross of Saint Gregory, 1912, conferred by Pope 
Pius X. 

Scorer, John G. 

Born in England in 1859. Educated in America; Ph.D. 
Educator and Lecturer; newspaper and magazine editor. 
Special writer on educational topics. Author of "Scorer's 
Principles of Oratory." 

Scott, John R. K 

Born at Bloomsburg, Pa., July 6, 1873. Educated in 
the public schools; graduated from the Central High 
School of Philadelphia in 1893; entered the law school of 
the University of Pennsylvania; admitted to the Bar in 
December, 1895; member of the House of Representatives 
of Pennsylvania session of 1899; again elected in 1908 and 
1910; re-elected November, 1912; elected as Congressman- 
at-Large from Pensylvania in November, 1914. 

23 



BIOGRAPHY OF PARTICIPANTS 

Search, Theodore C. 

Born in Southampton, Pa., March 20, 1841. A.M., Brown 
University, 1885. Manufacturer. President of the Penn- 
sylvania Museum and School of Industrial Art, Philadel- 
phia. 

Sessler, Charles. 

Born at Vienna, November 5, 1854. Educated in the 
public schools, graduating from the Royal High School; 
took a practical course in banking. Came to the United 
States in 1880, entering the book business at once, estab- 
lishing the present rare book center, specializing in first 
editions of Dickens, colored plate books, etc. Throughout 
his experience, he has been of assistance in the formation 
of bibliographical works on the subjects in which he spe- 
cializes. 

Smith, Edgar Fahs. 

Born York, Pa., May 23, 1856. B.S., Pennsylvania 
College, 1874; Ph.D., Goettingen, 1876; Sc.D., University 
of Pennsylvania, 1899; University of Dublin (Ireland), 
1912; Yale University, 1914; L.H.D., Muhlenberg College, 
1911; Chem.D., University of Pittsburgh, 1915; LL.D., Uni- 
versity of Wisconsin, 1904; University of Pennsylvania, 
1906; Pennsylvania College, 1906; Franklin and Marshall 
College, 1910; Rutgers College, 1911; University of Pitts- 
burgh, 1912; University of North Carolina, 1912; Prince- 
ton, 1913; Wittenberg, 1914; Brown University, 1914; 
Allegheny College, 1915. Blanchard Professor of Chemis- 
try and Provost, University of Pennsylvania. Author of 
Classen's Quantitative Analysis, Clinical Analysis of Urine 
(with Dr. J. Marshall), Richter's Inorganic Chemistry, 
Smith & Keller's Chemical Experimentation, Richter's Or- 
ganic Chemistry, Electro-Chemical Analysis, Oettel's 
Practical Exercises in Electro-Chemistry, Oettel's Electro- 
Chemical Experiments, Elements of Chemistry, Shorter 
Course Chemical Experiments, Theories of Chemistry, Ele- 
ments of Electro-Chemistry, Chemistry in America. 

Solis-Cohen, Solomon. 

Born in Philadelphia, September 1, 1857. A.B., Central 
High of Philadelphia, 1872; A.M., 1877; M.D., 1883, Jef- 
ferson Medical College; Professor Clinical Medicine, Jef- 
ferson Medical College, since 1902; Emeritus Professor of 
Medicine and Therapeutics, Philadelphia Polyclinic. Author 
of "Essentials of Diagnosis"; "Therapeutics of Tuber- 
culosis." Editor and part author of "A System of Physi- 
ologic Therapeutics." Editor or contributing editor of 
various medical periodicals. Author of various mono- 
graphs on medical subjects; contributor to medical and 
general encyclopedias; contributor of essays and verses to 
literary periodicals. 

24 



BIOGRAPHY OF PARTICIPANTS 

Staake, William H. 

Born in Brooklyn, N. Y., December 5, 1846. A.B., A.M., 
Central High of Philadelphia; L.L.B., University of Penn- 
sylvania. Judge of the Court of Common Pleas of Phila- 
delphia County. Author of many papers and addresses. 

Stuart, Edwin S. 

Born in Philadelphia, December 28, 1853. LL.D., Lafay- 
ette, University of Pennsylvania and University of Pitts- 
burgh. Merchant, President of the Board of Directors of 
City Trusts; Deputy Governor and member of Board of 
Directors of Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. Mayor 
of the City of Philadelphia, 1891-95 and Governor of the 
State of Pennsylvania, 1907-11. 

Thomson, John. 

Born in England, 1830. Educated in London. He came to 
Philadelphia in 1881. For eight years private Librarian 
to Clarence H. Clark, and three years to Jay Gould. Has 
been Librarian of the Free Library of Philadelphia since 
its organization. In 1904 he sought the co-operation of 
Andrew Carnegie and obtained a gift of $1,500,000 to be 
used in erection of thirty branch libraries throughout the 
city. Author of "Descriptive Catalogue of the Library of 
C. D. Clark"; "Catalogue of the Library of Jay Gould"; 
descriptive catalogue of the works of Sir Walter Scott; 
and the Library of Old Authors printed for the free 
library; and catalogues of the libraries of Thomas Dolan 
and the Rittenhouse Club; essays on "Black Books," de- 
livered before the Antiquarian Society, and a volume en- 
titled, "Hither and Thither," being a collection of essays 
on books, issued in book form in 1906. One of the found- 
ers of the Philobiblon Club, in 1904, and served continu- 
ously as its curator. 

Tilden, William T. 

Born St. George, Delaware, March 9, 1855. A.B. Central 
High School, Philadelphia, 1872. Merchant. President of 
Union League, 1912, 13, 14. Died July 29, 1915. 

Tompkins, Rev. Floyd. 

Born New York, February 7, 1850; A.B. Harvard, 1872; 
P.D. Gen. Theological Seminary, N. Y., 1875 (S.T.D.U. of 
Pa., 1901; LL.D. Temple College, 1903; D.D. University 
of the South, 1911) ; Church of Holy Trinity, Philadel- 
phia since 1899. Author of many books. 

Tower, Charlemagne. 

Born in Philadelphia, April 17, 1848. Graduated Har- 
vard University, 1872; LL.D., 1897, Lafayette; 1903, Uni- 
versity of Chicago; 1901, University of Glasgow (Scot- 
land) ; 1903, University of St. Andrews (Scotland); 1909, 

25 



BIOGRAPHY OF PARTICIPANTS 

Hamilton College. Admitted to the Philadelphia Bar in 
1878. Publisher of "The Marquis de La Fayette in the 
American Revolution," 1895. "Essays, Political and His- 
torical," 1914. United States Minister to Austria-Hun- 
gary, 1897. Ambassador to Russia, 1899. Ambassador to 
Germany, 1902-1908. 

Walton, Henry F. 

Born in Stroudsburg, Pa., October 2, 1858. LL.D., At- 
torney-at-Law ; Assistant City Solicitor; member of the 
Legislature, 1891, 1893, 1895, 1903, 1905, 1906; Chairman 
of the Republican State Committee, 1909, 1910; Speaker 
of the House of Representatives, 1895, 1903, 1905, 1906; 
Prothonotary of the Courts of Common Pleas of Philadel- 
phia County. 

Wheeler, Arthur L. 

Born in Philadelphia, May 11, 1873. Attended St. Paul's 
School, Concord, N. H. B.S. at Princeton University, 1896. 
Engaged in the manufacturing business. 

Wheeler, Walter S. 

Born at Bryn Mawr, July 31, 1875. Educated at Haver- 
ford School and by private tutors. Banking and manufac- 
turing; extensive traveler; Fellow Royal Geographical 
Society, etc. Editor of "The Optimist." 

White, J. William. 

Born in Philadelphia, November 2, 1850, M.D., Ph.D. Uni- 
versity of Pennsylvania, 1871, LL.D. Aberdeen, 1906. Con- 
nected with many hospitals and medical colleges, Fellow 
of College of Physicians of Philadelphia, Honorary Fellow, 
American College of Surgeons. Publications: American 
Text Book of Surgery, Genito-Urinary Surgery, Human 
Anatomy, numerous surgical articles and text books on 
surgery and systems of surgery ; Text Book of the War for 
Americans. 

Woodin, P. S. 

Born in Seville, Ohio, August 21, 1873. Educated in the 
public schools of Akron, Ohio; student in Butler Academy 
and under private tutelage. Certificate to teach, Empor- 
ium, Kansas, 1889-1890; Philadelphia. 1892, Principal; 1895, 
Supervisor; student Post-Graduate Department, University 
of Pennsylvania; Ph.D. course, 1894-1897; Temple Uni- 
versity Law Course, 1905-1908. Admitted to practice, 
1909. Successively Principal and Supervisor, Maple 
Grove. Watson Comly, Olney, and Marshall Public Schools, 
1892-1912. 

26 



(Otfu-c nf ilir liilu-an.iu 
(L!ic "Bietotiral ^ar«tij of JJcnnoiillinittM 

^lnl;ii>rlfilu;t 



May 5, 1914. 



Hon. John M. Patterson, 

Court of Common Pleas, 

City Hall, Philadelphia, 
Dear Judge Patterson:- 

At the suggestion of President Sam- 
uel W. Pennypacker, I am writing to request you to send us all 
the printed literature relating to the Trial of John Jasper, for 
preservation in this Society. 



Ycurs v c -ry truly, 
L^-^ Librarian, 




j3Lx\sia_^- 



Introduction 

BY JOHN M. PATTERSON 



We are told that the people of ancient Thebes 
were at one time in great fear of a certain monster 
which infested the highroad. It had the body of a 
lion and the upper part of a woman. It lay crouched 
on the top of a rock and arrested all travelers that 
came that way, proposing to them a riddle, with the 
condition that those who would solve the riddle 
should pass safely, but those who failed, should be 
killed. This monster was called a Sphinx, and has 
ever since been regarded as a fit emblem of mystery 
Yet, the riddle of the Sphinx was solved by ffidepus. 
This so mortified the Sphinx that she cast herself 
down from the rock and perished. The mistake that 
the Sphinx made was in not asking (Edepus the 
right question. Had she, or he, or it, only thought 
to inquire about the Mystery of Edwin Drood, the 
monster might have been alive to-day and (Edepus 
would not have been the cause of such a flood of 
dreadful woes as Mr. Sophocles describes. Unfor- 
tunately for the Sphinx, and, perhaps fortunately 
for us, the Mystery of Edwin Drood was unheard 
of until A.D. 1870. In that year England's great 
novelist propounded a riddle which no one has yet 
been able to solve. 

A great deal has been written about and con- 
cerning Dickens's last book. One writer after an- 
other has endeavored to fathom the mystery. 

Amongst those who have attempted the task, per- 
haps the most prominent have been the late Richard 
A. Proctor, Mr. J. Cuming Walters and Andrew 
Lang. Each of these had his pet theory. Proctor, 
in a small book entitled "Watched by the Dead," 
claimed that Drood was not murdered, but, after 
disappearing for a while returned in disguise, and 

27 



/ 
/ 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

assumed the name of Datchery. J. Cuming Walters 
has written several articles on the subject. He con- 
tends that Drood was murdered, but his endeavors 
to explain the "mystery" have not been very satis- 
factory. Andrew Lang has written a very clever 
little volume entitled "The Puzzle of Dickens's Last 
Plot," in which he argues that Edwin Drood does 
not die by the hand of John Jasper, but, after dis- 
appearing for a time, returns alive to take up his 
occupation as a civil engineer. 

Besides these efforts to explain "The Mystery of 
Edwin Drood," there have also been written several 
so-called sequels to the unfinished story. One of 
these is entitled "The Cloven Hoof," by Orpheus C. 
Kerr. Another is called "John Jasper's Secret," by 
Henry Morford, often erroneously attributed to 
Charles Dickens's eldest son and Wilkie Collins. 
Another is known as "The Mystery of Edwin Drood, 
Complete," wherein spiritualism is called upon to 
unravel the "mystery." The attempt to have com- 
munication with the spirit of Charles Dickens, and 
thus obtain a direct explanation of what the writer 
really meant, appears to have been successful. Still 
another sequel entitled "A Great Mystery Solved," 
by Gillan Vase (Mrs. Richard Newton), appeared. 
So one can see that "The Mystery of Edwin Drood" 
is a real "mystery" indeed. 

For a most comprehensive survey of the Drood 
controversy, as well as a full list of the books on 
the subject, see "The Complete Edwin Drood," by 
J. Cuming Walters. 

Now the history of the "mystery" may be divided 
into four parts. First — the writing of the unfin- 
ished book by the great novelist, ending in June, 
1870. Second — the literary controversy as to 
whether Drood was murdered or not, ending in 
January, 1914. Third — the trial of John Jasper, 
by Justice Gilbert K. Chesterton and a British jury, 

28 



INTRODUCTION 

on the 7th of January, 1914, at the King's Hall, 
Covent Garden. Fourth — the subsequent escape of 
Jasper to America, and his trial by Justice John P. 
Elkin, and a jury of Philadelphia's most prominent 
citizens, including a number of well-known profes- 
sional and literary men at the Academy of Music, 
on the 29th of April, 1914. 

Taking these four events in the order named, let 
us consider them. First, the writing of the book. 
It was a most unfortunate thing that Dickens did 
not finish the story, because it gave promise of being 
one of his best novels. "I hope his book is finished," 
Longfellow, the poet, wrote when he received the 
intelligence of Dickens's death, "it is certainly one 
of his most beautiful works, if not the most beauti- 
ful of all. It would be sad to think the pen had 
fallen from his hand, and left it incomplete." 

We all know, or think we know, that Drood was 
murdered by his uncle, Jasper, but the means and 
the method of the murder still remain obscure. 
There is not one note of death in aught that Edwin 
Drood does or says, nor is there any direct evidence 
that he is really dead, or even that his life was 
attempted by Jasper. Everything is circumstantial. 
There is no doubt, however, that Dickens intended 
to convey the impression that Edwin Drood was 
murdered by Jasper. 

As to the books which have been written, the 
most that can be said of the best of them is that they 
are clever. None of them is convincing, because all 
of them are simply speculations and theories. The 
very fact that the case, when tried in London, 
excited so much interest, indicates that the various 
controversial book-writers had been unable to con- 
vince many people. 

Ordinarily the verdict of a British jury satisfies 
the British public. But the verdict of "man- 
slaughter," which was rendered against John Jas- 

29 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

per, instead of satisfying the public, only left con- 
fusion more confounded and added to the uncer- 
tainty already existing. Not only did the English 
people declare that the verdict meant nothing, but 
the entire Dickensian world protested that Jasper 
should have been convicted of murder, or else ac- 
quitted. He was guilty, or not guilty, and a verdict 
in the Pickwickian sense would never do, even if 
Bernard Shaw were foreman of the jury which 
rendered such a verdict. 

It was not with any idea of absolutely settling the 
question, one way or another, that the Philadelphia 
Branch of the Dickens Fellowship decided to have 
John Jasper tried for the murder of Edwin Drood. 
In the opinion of the writer the question will never 
be satisfactorily settled for many reasons. It may 
even be doubted if Charles Dickens really knew what 
the final outcome of the story was to be. The object 
of the trial was simply to present the facts set forth 
in the book, and no others, to a jury of twelve intel- 
ligent and representative citizens; to have those 
facts presented by learned and experienced advo- 
cates in the same manner that facts are presented 
in a court of justice and subject to the rules of 
judicial evidence; and to have those advocates use 
their utmost ability in endeavoring to convince the 
twelve jurors that the facts either showed, or failed 
to show, that John Jasper murdered Edwin Drood. 
Surely such a proceeding was as likely to shed light 
upon the question as any other method. Of course, 
in addition to this, there was also the desire to 
entertain the audience, and to widen, if possible, the 
interest in the writings of Charles Dickens. It should 
also be remembered that the average man or woman 
has never seen the trial of a murder case, and it was 
intended to give the public a correct representation 
of a murder trial. There is always something fas- 
cinating about such a case. It is hard to tell to what 

30 



INTRODUCTION 

this interest is due. It may be due to the fact that 
crime represents something abnormal — something 
which expresses the exact opposite to the almost 
exaggerated routine of a well-disciplined existence — 
or perhaps it may be due to those vehement and 
irregular passions of men which are so unexpectedly 
brought to the surface. Perhaps a little of both, 
or perhaps it is occasioned by that manifestation 
of the element of error and uncertainty which ever 
and anon seems to mock, as with the silent laughter 
of a Sphinx, the most cautious and deliberate in- 
quiry into a few meagre facts which seem to evi- 
dence a crime. Nevertheless the interest exhibited 
by all sorts and conditions of men and women in 
the outcome of a criminal trial is so common, and 
so keen, that it really helps to make the whole world 
kin. 

We never tire of reading, again and again, the his- 
tory of celebrated trials, whether they be of real 
personages or of creatures of the imagination. 

No less a personage than Edmond Burke once 
said: "I have often wondered that the English 
language contains no book like the causes celebres of 
the French. Such a collection would exhibit man 
as he is in action and principle, and not as he is 
usually drawn by poets and speculative philos- 
ophers." 

To-day there are many books which deal with cele- 
brated trials both in Europe and America. Most of 
us are familiar with accounts of the trials of Sir 
Walter Raleigh, of Thomas, Earl of Strafford, of the 
poet, Richard Savage, of the Salem Witches, of War- 
ren Hastings, of Aaron Burr, of Professor Webster, 
of Alfred Dreyfus, and a host of others too nu- 
merous to mention. These cases not only created a 
lively interest at the time, but have been able to 
retain a place in the pages of books still worth read- 
ing. 

31 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Then there are those celebrated trials to be 
found in the great works of fiction. Shakespeare has 
given us a wonderful trial scene in the Merchant of 
Venice. Bulwer and Hood have spun their webs of 
romance around the schoolmaster of Lynn, until it is 
hard to tell where fiction begins and history ends. 
In The Heart of Midlothian, the Wizard of the North 
has made Effie Deans the central figure in a most 
stirring picture of court room proceedings. 

There never was a better stage presentation of a 
court proceeding than that which took place at the 
American Academy of Music on the evening of 
April 29th, 1914. The old Academy had been the 
scene of many extraordinary performances in the 
past. From July 26th, 1855, when the cornerstone 
was laid in the presence of Mayor Robert T. Conrad, 
and a great gathering of the patrons of the opera, 
until the night of the famous Jasper Trial, the stage 
of this historic building has echoed the foot-falls of 
many of the world's celebrities. 

On January 26th, 1857, the formal opening was 
celebrated by a magnificent ball, at which the wealth 
and fashion of Philadelphia gathered in full force. 
The house was opened for its legitimate use by E. A. 
Marshall, with Verdi's "II Trovatore," sung by Max 
Maretzek's opera troupe, of which the famous Mad- 
ame Marietta Gazzaniga was the prima donna; the 
full cast being as follows: Leonora, Madame Gaz- 
zaniga; Azucema, Mile. Aldini; Maurico, Sig. Brig- 
noli; Count di Luna, Sig. Amodio; Ferando, Sig. 
Coletti ; Old Gypsy, Sig. Muttro. 

In 1860 a great ball was given at the Academy 
in honor of the Prince of Wales, later Edward VII. 
He was delighted at the architectural splendors of 
the building, and said so in unequivocal terms. 

Too exhaustive is the list of world renowned 
singers who have gained additional laurels on the 
stage of this great play-house. Suffice to say that 

32 







u, o 

c o 



a is 
< S 

<! a) 

s- 

W 1U 

I — 



INTRODUCTION 

the roster includes Adelina Patti, Mancusi, Morentsi, 
Sulzer, Mazzalini, Bellini, Calletti, Medori, Zuchi, 
Bosisio, Carnien Poch, Hauk, Parepa Rosa, Anna 
de la Grange, Torriani, Albani, Anna Christine Nils- 
son, Campanini, Maurel, Nannetti, Ranconi, Pappen- 
heim, and the great stars whose names have become 
household words within the last three decades. 

Grant was nominated for his second term as Pres- 
ident of the United States by a Republican Conven- 
tion held in the Academy in 1872. This was one of 
the most important of the many political events held 
there. 

Occasionally conspicuous dramatic representa- 
tions were given by Edwin Forrest, Charlotte Cush- 
man, and special companies organized for the per- 
formance of particular plays. 

Booth, Ristori and Salvini also appeared there in 
repertoire. 

Among the famous instrumentalists who have 
given concerts at the Academy are Ole Bull, Vieux- 
temps, Rubenstein, Weiniawski, Von Bulow, Sauret, 
Moreau, Legendre, Gottschalk, Marie Krebs, Mehlig, 
Schiller, Careno, Godard and Paderewski. 

The Stoddard illustrated travel pictures had their 
first presentation in the Academy, and among the 
prominent men in the intellectual world who drew 
immense audiences were Henry Ward Beecher, Ro- 
bert G. Ingersoll, T. B. Pugh, John B. Gough and T. 
Dewitt Talmage. 

Dom Pedro, Emperior of Brazil, was frequently at 
the Academy during the Centennial. 

It will thus be seen that no fitter place on the 
American continent could have been chosen wherein 
to try this most celebrated case. With such a cele- 
brated trial, and in such an historic court room, it 
was necessary that the trial judge should represent 
the best traditions of the American judiciary, and 
that the jury should consist of men who command 

33 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

the esteem and confidence, not only of the parties, 
but of the community, as well. The Judge selected 
to preside was Justice John P. Elkin, of the Supreme 
Court of Pennsylvania. 

The jury, as finally drawn, consisted of: 

1. John Bach MacMaster 

2. George W. Elkins 

3. James W. King 

4. A. G. Hetherington 

5. William Findlay Brown 

6. Rudolph Blankenburg 

7. Edgar Fahs Smith 

8. George Wharton Pepper 

9. Samuel W. Pennypacker 

10. J. Parker Norris 

11. Charlemagne Tower 

12. J. William White. 

The prosecution had retained as its attorneys, 
Attorney-General John C. Bell and Judge John M. 
Patterson. 

The defense was represented by Attorneys John 
R. K. Scott and Percival S. Woodin. 

Of course the real John Jasper did not appear at 
the trial, because he existed only in the fancy of the 
"Inimitable Boz." 

The melancholy schemer was portrayed by John 
P. Coughlin, a member of the Philadelphia Bar. 

Mr. Coughlin as John Jasper was a triumph of 
impersonation. He sat in the dock quietly, through- 
out most of the trial, watching the witnesses from 
under his dark brows, sometimes covering his face 
with his hand, at other moments leaning forward to 
keep his intense gaze on Rosa Bud. When he took 
the stand his nimble wit in parrying dangerous ques- 
tioning during cross examination, won him much 

34 



INTRODUCTION 

praise. Under the law, as it existed, at the period 
laid in the book, Jasper could not have testified. 

Dr. Wilmer Krusen, a prominent surgeon, essayed 
the part of Crisparkle, and gave just the right cler- 
ical touch to the honest, kindly, boyish, athletic 
canon. 

Mayor Sapsea appeared in the person of Joseph 
P. Rogers, who was at that time an assistant dis- 
trict attorney, and is now a Common Pleas Judge. 
He was the pompous auctioneer to the life, though 
far more keen witted. He seemed to enter into the 
spirit of the part as thoroughly as any professional 
actor. His costume, make-up, mannerisms and 
repartee, all combined to draw continued laughter 
from the audience, and a burst of deserved applause 
when he left the witness stand. 

The drunken Durdles, as enacted by John G. 
Scorer, was delicious. He made an excellent witness. 
He imitated the popular conception of intoxication 
to such perfection that when he left the stand he 
was followed by a murmur of approval which is 
even more significant of appreciation than the per- 
functory handclapping. 

The angular Mr. Grewgious was cleverly imper- 
sonated by John Kent Kane, a member of the Phil- 
adelphia Bar. 

Neville Landless was excellently acted by Paxson 
Deeter, Esq., a member of the Philadelphia Bar. 

Ralph Bingham played the part of a typical Eng- 
lish Bobby. While "not in the book," and, accord- 
ing to the canons of the critics, not properly in the 
trial at all, because they don't have English Bobbies 
in Courts, Mr. Bingham made a decided "hit." 

The two tipstaves, Athur L. and Walter S. 
Wheeler, of giant bulk, were superb in their brilliant 
uniforms. In appearance and actions they added 
glowingly to the scene. 

The women, Rosa Bud, played by Miss Winifred 

35 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

de Mercier; Mrs. Tope, done by Miss Sarah A. 
Evans ; Helena Landless, by Mrs. J. Howard Reber, 
and the Princess Puffer, by Mrs. Miriam Lei Earley 
Lippincott, were all excellent, fitting their roles like 
the glove on your hand. 

Mrs. Lippincott, in particular, gave a dramatic 
and horribly realistic portrayal of the opium woman. 
Her performance was one of the notable points of 
the evening. 

A word as to the stage and the house. The set- 
ting was most impressive. The Academy stage pre- 
sented a true and accurate picture of the English 
court room. The chairs of the witnesses and jurors, 
the counsel table, seats for spectators, and the bench 
upon which Justice Elkin sat, were exact reproduc- 
tions of the courts of England during the time of 
Dickens. The characters in the trial, from the jus- 
tice down to the spectators, were arrayed in cos- 
tumes familiar to the lover of the English novelist. 
No detail was omitted to take the audience back more 
than a half century. 

The court room was so arranged that the presid- 
ing judge faced an audience, made up of Philadel- 
phia's wealth, learning, business activity, culture 
and beauty, that filled the Academy from parquet 
to amphitheatre. 

The trial began at 7.30 o'clock P. M., and lasted 
until 12.30 A. M. As an evidence of the intense 
interest which the audience had in the outcome of 
the trial, it is sufficient to say that few, if any, failed 
to remain until the verdict was rendered. 

After retiring to deliberate, the jury remained 
out for the best part of an hour. It had been agreed 
beforehand that a majority vote should decide. Of 
course, under the law of Pennsylvania, the verdict 
of the jury must be unanimous. One of the reasons 
for having a majority vote to decide the nature of 
the verdict in the Jasper trial was in order that the 

36 



INTRODUCTION 

audience should not be detained for an indefinite 
time. 

When the jury first retired, the vote was six for 
conviction, and six for acquittal. It subsequently 
changed to nine for acquittal and three for convic- 
tion. When the jury was finally poled, after return- 
ing to the court room, the vote stood eleven for 
acquittal and one for conviction. The defense had 
relied mainly on the failure of the prosecution to 
prove that anybody had been murdered. In Penn- 
sylvania, and many other jurisdictions, it is a gen- 
eral rule that the prosecution has the burden of 
proving that a crime has been committed before the 
jury proceed to inquire as to who committed it. That 
means that in a murder case, it must first be shown 
that somebody is really dead. This is ordinarily a 
question for the court and not for the jury. A con- 
viction cannot be sustained unless the corpus delicti, 
as it is technically called, be clearly established. 
Instances have occurred where a person has been 
convicted of having killed another, and where, after 
the supposed criminal has been put to death for the 
supposed offense, the man alleged to have been mur- 
dered has made his appearance alive. The wisdom 
of the rule is therefore obvious. Of course if this 
rule as to establishing the corpus delicti, had been 
rigidly adherred to in the Trial of John Jasper, it 
might have been necessary for the trial judge to have 
taken the case from the jury. It was, therefore, 
deemed better to allow the jury to consider the entire 
question, and to say from all the evidence whether — 
(1) there was enough to establish a death; and (2) 
— whether such death was caused by the criminal 
agency of John Jasper. 

As already stated, eleven of the jury declared that 
there was not sufficient evidence to warrant a ver- 
dict of guilty. In a regularly constituted court of jus- 
tice, of course, there could not have been a convic- 

37 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

tion under the evidence ; but when one considers the 
character of the jury at the Academy and remem- 
bers that the corpus delicti was not required to be 
proven, in a strictly legal manner, but that the lay 
mind was allowed to draw any inference it chose 
from the evidence, then it is fair to assume that the 
vote of this jury represents the average opinion of 
men of more than average intelligence who have 
had both sides of the question fully presented to 
them. Such being the case then "The Mystery of 
Edwin Drood" takes its place alongside of those 
other great historical literary mysteries. There are 
a great many of them. The mystery of the Man in 
the Iron Mask, whose mask, we are told, was not 
iron at all but velvet, still fascinates the young and 
the old. The murderer of Sir Edmund Berry Godfrey 
has never been identified, though three guiltless men 
have been hanged for the supposed crime. The au- 
thor of the "Letters of Junius" is still unknown, 
although many people suppose him to have been Sir 
Philip Francis. There is still much discussion as 
to the identity of James de la Cloche and whether 
he was what he claimed to be or a rank imposter. 
Then we have U Affaire du Collier, the old familiar 
story of Jeanne de Valois, Cardinal Rohan, Caglios- 
tro, Marie Antonette and the diamond necklace. Who 
among us has not speculated upon this most fascin- 
ating episode in French history? Who has not sym- 
pathized with the beautiful Queen ? 

Some people doubt that the Bard of Avon "wrote 
Shakespeare." The Baconian Creed, in regard to the 
Shakespeare plays, has been advocated in hundreds 
of books and pamphlets. It is scouted by most of us, 
but "there are foolisher fellows than the Baconians" 
says a sage — "those who argue against them." The 
list of famous mysteries is long and interesting — too 
long to be recited here. It is with the trial of John 
Jasper at the Academy of Music that we are con- 

38 



INTRODUCTION 

cerned, and not with these other mysteries, so we 
must confine ourselves to that question. 

There is one celebrated mystery, however, that de- 
serves special mention. Who does not recall the 
controversy over the antiquarian discovery made by 
Mr. Pickwick wherein seventeen learned societies 
participated ? We are told that to this day the stone 
which the great Pickwick discovered, near the 
Leather Bottle at Cobham, remans an illegible monu- 
ment of his greatness and a lasting trophy to the 
littleness of his enemies. 

In concluding this introduction let us pay tribute to 
the genius of him who has added much to the happi- 
ness of our lives. All honor to Charles Dickens, the 
master of humor and pathos, the kindly engen- 
derer of the Christmas spirit, the propounder of 
the unsolved riddle of the Mystery of Edwin Drood. 
His name still lives because of the vitality of his 
works, and their perennial freshness and graphic 
character delineations. His imagination, his fancy, 
his wit, his keen observation, and his wonderful 
descriptive powers, united with a charming spirit 
of universal brotherhood, prove his right to sleep 
in the old Abbey undisturbed by any earthly thing 
save that homage which belongs to the honored 
dead. 

John M. Patterson 



Philadelphia, March 14th, 1916. 



39 



Trial of John Jasper 
for the Murder of Edwin Drood 



Court Crier : O Yea ! Yea ! Yea ! All manner 
of men who stand bound by recognizance or other- 
wise have to do before the Honorable, The Judges 
of the Court of Oyer and Terminer, General Jail 
Delivery and Quarter Sessions of the Peace, at the 
Assizes here holden this day for the County of Phil- 
adelphia, may now appear and they shall be heard. 
God save the Commonwealth and this Honorable 
Court. 

The Court: The Court will now announce its 
rules. The jurors, the counselors, the witnesses, 
and the audience, as a rule, are not expected to 
applaud in a court of justice. That rule will be 
suspended to-night, so far as the audience is con- 
cerned, but it will apply to all the witnesses and to 
the jurors who are selected to try the case. 

The Clerk will now proceed to call the list of 
jurors. 

Court Clerk: Gentlemen of the jury, as your 
names are called, you will arise, and answer present. 

C. C. A. Baldi (Present) 

Martin V. Bergen (Present) 

Rudolph Blankenburg (Present) 

William Findlay Brown (Present) 

Martin G. Brumbaugh (Present) 

Henry Budd (Present) 

William A. Carr (Present) 

J. H. Carstairs (Present) 

F. T. Chandler (Present) 

J. Chalmers Da Costa (Absent) 

40 



DRAWING THE JURY 



Thomas A. Daly 
John B. Deaver 
George W. Elkins 
William R. Ellison 
Nathan T. Folwell 
John Marshall Gest 
John Gribbell 
John F. Haneker 
M. F. Hanson 
C. C. Harrison 
A. G. Hetherington 
Morris Jastrow, Jr. 
Alba B. Johnson 
C. F. Kavanagh 
George W. Kendrick, Jr. 
James W. King 
Francis A. Lewis 
John Luther Long 
Joseph B. McCall 
John H. McFadden 
John B. McMaster 
Charles R. Miller 
Leslie W. Miller 
Thomas E. Murphy 
Wm. R. Nicholson 
J. Parker Norris 
Thomas K. Ober 
Ellis P. Oberholtzer 
George W. Ochs 
Samuel W. Pennypacker 
George Wharton Pepper 
A. S. W. Rosenbach 
Samuel P. Rotan 
Theodore C. Search 
Edgar F. Smith 
S. Solis-Cohen 
William H. Staake 
John Thomson 

41 



(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 

(Absent) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 

(Absent) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 
(Present) 

(Absent) 

(Absent) 
(Present) 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

William T. Tilden (Present) 

Floyd W. Tomkins (Present) 

Charlemagne Tower (Present) 

J. William White (Present) 

Gentlemen of the jury, have you all answered to 
your names? 

Jurors : We have. 

The Court: The Court will now proceed to call 
the list for trial. 

Commonwealth v. John Jasper. Are you ready? 

Mr. Bell: Trial for the Commonwealth. 

The Court : What say counsel for the defence ? 

Mr. Scott: The defence is ready. 

The Court: Officer, produce the prisoner. 

(John Jasper is placed in the prisoner's box.) 

The Court: The Clerk will now proceed to ar- 
raign the prisoner. 

Court Clerk: John Jasper, stand up. 

John Jasper, hearken unto an indictment, pre- 
sented by the Grand Inquest of the Commonwealth 
of Pennsylvania, inquiring for the County of Phila- 
delphia, charging you with the murder of Edwin 
Drood. How say you, — guilty, or not guilty ? 

John Jasper: Not guilty. 

Court Clerk: How will you be tried? 

John Jasper: By a jury of my peers and by the 
law of Pennsylvania. 

Court Clerk : And may the law send you a safe 
deliverance. 

John Jasper, you are now set to the Bar of the 
Court for trial, and these good men whose names 
you will hear called, will pass between the Com- 
monwealth and you on trial. You have the right to 
challenge twenty of them peremptorily and as many 
more as you show cause for challenge. 

The Court: The Clerk will now proceed to call 
the jury, in order that twelve jurors may be selected 

42 




Some of the Veniremen 

Reading from left to right. Top row: L. W. Miller, J. W. White. M. F. Hanson, H. Lovett, F. A. Lewis, T. K. Ober. J. 1!. McMaster, M. V. Bergen, J. M. Gest, 
Middle row : J. W. King, J. P. Norris. Charlemagne Tower. Henry Budd, S. W. Pennypaeker- O. W. Keixriek. A. S. \V. Rosenbach. Rev. C. F. Kavanagh. E. F. Smith, J. Gribbell, C. R. Miller, W. 
Bottom row ; C, C. A. Baldi, N. T. Folwell, W, A, Cam J. F, Huneker. S. P. Rotan, \. G. Hetherington, W. R, Ellison, J. H. Carstnirs, J. B. McCall, G. w. Elkins. 



DRAWING THE JURY 

to pass upon the guilt or innocence of the prisoner 
at the bar. The Clerk will proceed. 

Court Crier: No. 1, John Bach McMaster. 

Court Clerk: Come forward, please. As the 
jurors names are called, they will walk forward, 
and present themselves at the bar of the court. 

The Court: I should like to suggest that they do 
this as expeditiously as possible, in order that time 
may be saved. 

Court Clerk: Juror look upon the prisoner; 
prisoner look upon the juror. How say you, chal- 
lenge or no challenge? 

Mr. Scott: No challenge. 

Mr. Bell : I desire to ask a few questions of the 
gentleman on his voir dire. 

The Court: Proceed with the examination. 
By Mr. Bell : 

Q. Do you know anything about this case in 
which John Jasper is charged, in the Bill of Indict- 
ment, with the murder of his nephew, Edwin 
Drood? 

A. Nothing but hearsay. 

Q. Has what you have heard made any lasting 
impression upon your mind as to his guilt or inno- 
cence? 

A. No lasting impression. 

Q. Have you any conscientious scruples against 
capital punishment? 

A. None whatever, when it is deserved. 

Q. Then if you were selected as a juror in this 
case, you could go into the box and hear the evi- 
dence, and under the Charge of the Court, render 
an unbiased verdict? 

A. I should try to ; yes. 

Q. You are a historian, aren't you ? 

A. Yes. 

Q. May I respectfully suggest that should you 
write a history of the world to-morrow, or the day 

43 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

following, that you should record this as one of the 
great epoch-making events in international peace 
and justice? I have no doubt that counsel for the 
defence and his Honor joins in that request. 

The Court: The request is granted. 

(Juror is seated in the jury box.) 

Court Crier: No. 2, George W. Elkins. 

Juror look upon the prisoner; prisoner look upon 
the juror. How say you, challenge or no challenge? 

Mr. Scott: No challenge. 

Mr. Bell : A few questions upon his voir dire, sir. 

The Court: Proceed with the examination. 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. Are you of Saxon blood, sir? 

A. Either that or Irish. 

Q. Don't you know, sir? 

A. I have not discovered yet. 

MR. Bell: Well, I think I will pass him. 

(Juror seated in jury box.) 

Court Crier: No. 3, James W. King. 

Court Clerk: Juror look upon the prisoner; 
prisoner look upon the juror. How say you, chal- 
lenge or no challenge? 

Mr. Scott : No challenge. 

Mr. Bell: "Could you walk with kings, nor lose 
the common touch?" 

A. I could. 

Mr. Bell: Take a seat in the box. 

(Juror seated in jury box.) 

Court Crier: No. 4, A. G. Hetherington. 

Court Clerk: Juror look upon the prisoner; 
prisoner look upon the juror. How say you, chal- 
lenge or no challenge? 

Mr. Scott : No challenge. 

44 



DRAWING THE JURY 

By Mr. Bell: 

Q. Did you say your name was Beau Brummel? 

A. Yes. 

Mr. Bell: I fear were I to challenge him, sir, I 
might bring down his gray hairs in sorrow to the 
grave. Therefore I shall not. 

(Juror takes seat in the jury boy.) 

Court Crier: No. 5, William Findlay Brown. 

Court Clerk: Juror look upon the prisoner; 
prisoner look upon the juror. How say you, chal- 
lenge or no challenge? 

Mr. Scott: I desire to examine the juror upon 
his voir dire. 

The Court: Proceed with the examination. 
By Mr. Scott: 

Q. You are an assistant district attorney, aren't 
you? 

A. On the first of every month, when pay day 
comes around; yes. 

Q. Your principal work has been the hanging of 
men, hasn't it? 

A. No ; I think I am the great American Shooer- 
Out.* 

Q. How long have you been connected with the 
District Attorney's Office? 

A. About seven years. 

Q. Do you feel that you could sit in the jury box 
and actually acquit a man charged with murder? 

(Applause and laughter.) 

A. I might acquit the defendant, but I certainly 
could not acquit his counsel. 

Mr. Bell: I ask that this juror be sworn. 

Mr. Scott: I object to this juror. I do not think 
he is worthy of being a juror. He has shown not 



*Mr. Brown, an assistant district attorney, bears the repu- 
tation of being very merciful and very fair. 

45 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

only his feeling toward the defendant, but his bias 
towards counsel for the defendant. 

The Court : Juror, turn to the Court. Could you 
go into the jury box, hear the evidence, and decide 
the case upon its merits, without regard to your 
professional training (laughter) or your other con- 
victions ? 

A. Absolutely. 

The Court: The juror is qualified. Let him have 
his seat. 

(Laughter.) 

(Juror takes his seat in the jury box.) 

Tipstaves: Silence! Silence! 

The Court: The officers of the Court will please 
preserve silence. 

Court Crier: No. 6, Rudolph Blankenburg. 

(Applause.) 

Court Clerk: Juror look upon the prisoner; 
prisoner look upon the juror. How say you, chal- 
lenge or no challenge? 

Mr. Bell : No challenge. I would not dare do so. 

Mr. Scott: I desire to examine the juror on his 
voir dire. 

The Court: Proceed with the examination. 
By Mr. Scott: 

Q. You are Mayor, aren't you? 

A. I am a servant of the public. Sometimes they 
are called Mayor. 

Q. Would you be influenced in your finding in this 
case, if it came to your attention that another great 
Mayor, Mayor Sapsea, of Cloisterham, were called 
upon the witness stand to testify in behalf of the 
defence? 

A. Would that influence me? 

Q. Would that influence your verdict? 

A. Nothing influences me except what is right. 

(Applause.) 

46 



DRAWING THE JURY 

Q. As a German, do you have such prejudice 
against an Englishman as to influence your judg- 
ment in rendering a verdict against him? 

A. I have not, because the Englishman is a de- 
scendant of the German. 

(Applause.) 

Q. Well, Mr. Mayor, notwithstanding the acci- 
dent of birth (laughter), could you go into the jury 
box and render an impartial verdict upon the evi- 
dence, even if the life of an Englishman were at 
stake? 

A. Most assuredly. 

Mr. Scott: May it please your Honor, I object to 
this juror. I do not think he is qualified. I do not 
think he has shown sufficient knowledge of his 
duties as an American citizen to qualify him to sit 
in an American jury. 

The Court: It is true that this juror is of Ger- 
man birth, but he belongs to a race that believes in 
the supremacy of law, devotion to duty, and loyalty 
to the cause of good government. The Court knows 
this juror will do his duty as an American citizen, 
with pride and affection for the state of his adop- 
tion. The objection is overruled. 

(Applause.) 

Juror takes his seat in the jury box. 

Court Crier: No. 7, Edgar F. Smith. 

Court Clerk: Juror look upon the prisoner; 
prisoner look upon the juror. How say you, chal- 
lenge or no challenge? 

Mr. Scott : No challenge. 

Mr. Bell: I should like to have it noted upon 
the record that Fate tried to conceal him by naming 
him Smith. 

(Laughter.) 

The Court : It is all right for the counsel to make 
the remark, but it need not be recorded. 

(Laughter.) 

47 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

The juror will take his seat. 

Mr. Bell : No ; I should like to examine him upon 
his voir dire. 

The Court: I beg pardon, but counsel must pro- 
ceed expeditiously. 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. You are Provost of the great University of 
the Commonwealth. 

A. I am. 

Q. I believe that the sun never sets on the sons 
of Penn? 

(Applause.) 

A. That is true. 

Q. Did you ever have John Jasper or Edwin 
Drood enrolled upon the records of the University? 

(Laughter.) 

A. Never, sir. 

Q. Then I apprehend that the love and partiality 
that you bear for all the sons of Penn would not, of 
course, obtain in this case? 

A. It would not. 

Q. And you could render an unbiased verdict? 

A. I could, sir. 

(Juror takes seat in jury box.) 

Court Crier: No. 8, George Wharton Pepper. 

Court Clerk: Juror look upon the prisoner; 
prisoner look upon the juror. How say you, chal- 
lenge or no challenge? 

Mr. Scott : No challenge. 

Mr. Bell: May I rise to a question of privilege, 
sir? 

The Court: Proceed. 

Mr. Bell : I feel it my duty in the interest of fair 
play to say to counsel on the other side that this 
gentleman is a great, not to say marvelous, baseball 
lawyer. He recently convinced a judge, a Federal 
judge, that if a ball player, a Federal ball player, 

48 



DRAWING THE JURY 

came into court to play the game, he must do it with 
clean hands. It is a marvel how an ordinary ball 
player can play the game with clean hands.* 
Ey Mr. Bell: 

Q. Do you believe that this defendant could come 
into court with clean hands? 

A. That is a question that I can answer when I 
have heard the evidence, but not until then. 

Q. If he should have clean hands, and a pure 
heart, of course you would acquit him? 

A. Yes. 

Mr. Bell: His hands are soiled. Take your seat 
in the box. 

Mr. Scott: I desire to interrogate the juror. 

The Court : Proceed with the examination. 
By Mr. Scott: 

Q. You being a man trained in baseball playing, 
have you any thought of running for Governor.t 

(Laughter and Applause.) 

Tipstaves: Silence! Silence! Order in the court. 

A. That is not within the circle of my ambition. 

Mr. Scott: The juror is accepted. 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. You believe, however, in the doctrine of pre- 
cedent, don't you? 

A. Properly applied, as the Court will apply it. 



*At the date of the trial, war was being waged by the newly 
organized Federal League against "Organized Baseball." 
The Federal League induced "Reindeer" Killifer, a player of 
exceptional skill, to break his contract with the Philadelphia 
Club and to sign a contract with the Federals. When he 
subsequently changed his mind the Federals undertook to 
restrain him by injunction from playing with the Philadelphia 
Club. Mr. Pepper appeared for Killifer and the Philadelphia 
Club. It was held that the Federals came into court with un- 
clean hands and were not entitled to the relief prayed for. 
See Weeghman et al vs. Killifer et al, 215 Fed. Rep. 289 
(1914). 

fThe then Governor of Pennsylvania, Honorable John K. 
Tener, had been a baseball player, and is now president of 
the National Baseball League. 

49 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

The Court : Counsel will observe the rules. First, 
counsel for the prosecution may examine; then 
counsel for the defense, if he thinks proper. Then 
the examination ceases. Let order be preserved 
in this examination. The Court desires to say to 
the juror that nothing developed in the examination 
of this juror disqualifies him to sit in the case. The 
Court knows his fidelity to duty, his patience in 
working out the details in a case, and feels con- 
strained to say that he meets the requirements of 
the law in every particular. 

Juror takes seat in the jury box. 

Court Crier : No. 9, Samuel W. Pennypacker. 

(Applause.) 

Court Clerk: Juror look upon the prisoner; 
prisoner look upon the juror. How say you, chal- 
lenge or no challenge? 

Mr. Scott: No challenge. 

Mr. Bell: No challenge, sir. 

Juror takes seat in jury box. 

Court Crier : No. 10, J. Parker Norris. 

Court Clerk: Juror look upon the prisoner; 
prisoner look upon the juror. How say you, chal- 
lenge or no challenge? 

Mr. Scott: I desire to examine the juror on his 
voir dire. 

The Court: Proceed with the examination. 
By Mr. Scott: 

Q. Have you read the account of the charge 
against the prisoner, Jasper, as recorded by the 
reporter, Dickens? 

A. I have not. 

Q. Have you formed any opinion, or expressed 
any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of John 
Jasper? 

A. None whatever. 

50 



DRAWING THE JURY 

Mr. Scott: Satisfied. No challenge. 
Juror takes seat in jury box. 

Court Crier: No. 11, Charlemagne Tower. 

Court Clerk: Juror look upon the prisoner; 
prisoner look upon the juror. How say you, chal- 
lenge or no challenge? 

Mr. Scott : No challenge. 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. Do you know, sir, that there is a "tower" in 
this case? 

A. No, sir; I do not know it. 

Q. Have you ever had any intimate acquaintance 
with London Tower? 

A. No, sir; not myself. 

Q. Do you happen to know, just as a matter of 
historic interest, when Marmion shook his gauntlet 
at the towers, whether he was indicted for treason 
by your family? 

A. It was not a near relative of mine. 

Q. Do you know anything about this case? 

A. No, sir; nothing whatever. 

Mr. Bell: If the Court please, as this witness 
seems to have no acquaintance with London Tower, 
and a lack of knowledge generally, I think he would 
make a good juror. 

The Court: The observations of the counsel are 
not proper as a test of the qualifications of a juror. 
The juror is eminently qualified to sit in this case, 
and he will take his place in the box. 

Mr. Bell: I beg your Honor's pardon for appar- 
ently throwing you into a towering rage. 

Juror takes seat in jury box. 

Court Crier : No. 12, J. William White. 

Court Clerk: Juror look upon the prisoner; 
prisoner look upon the juror. How say you, chal- 
lenge or no challenge? 

51 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Mr. Scott : I desire to examine the juror upon 
his voir dire. 
By Mr. Scott: 

Q. You are sometimes known as Dr. White, aren't 
you? 

A. I have been called so. 

Q. One time you were connected with the Univer- 
sity of Pennsylvania? 

A. I still am. 

Q. And I suppose you are acquainted with the 
medical staff of the University of Pennsylvania? 

A. Very well. 

Q. Have you heard any recent discussion there of 
vivisection, Doctor?* 

A. I have heard much discussion of it, some of it 
from counsel for the defence. 

Q. Since the discussion that you heard, have you 
lost faith in the jury trial? 

A. My faith was somewhat weakened, but not 
destroyed. 

Mr. Scott: No challenge. 

Mr. Bell : Pardon me, sir. This examination has 
been very circumscribed. This is an international 
case. 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. I would like to know of you, as a physician, 
whether you have ever suffered from Anglo-mania? 

A. No, sir ; and I resent the imputation. 

Q. Well, you at least have been inoculated with 
Anglo-mania? 

A. Not that I am aware of. 

Q. Why, haven't you rubbed elbows with those 
fellow members of the Reform Club in London and 
the Aberdeen University, and worn the red coat 



*A University of Pennsylvania professor had but recently 
been indicted and tried for cruelty to animals — the case grow- 
ing out of the vivisection of certain animals. Mr. Scott had 
represented the private prosecution. 

52 



SWEARING THE JURY 

which is very like the Justice's, and you mean to 
say you were not inoculated? 

A. It is not catching. 

Q. Well, you wore this Scotch red coat, didn't 
you? 

A. I did. 

Mr. Bell: Ah, you did. If the Court please, I 
hae me doots about this juror, and ye' re challenged. 

The Court: The questions are not a proper test 
of the qualification of a juror. The challenge is 
overruled, and the juror will take his seat in the 
jury box. 

(Juror takes seat in jury box.) 

Court Crier: The jury box is full. 

The Court: Let the jurors be affirmed. 

Court Clerk: You and each of you do declare 
that you will well and truly try, and a true deliver- 
ance make, between the Commonwealth of Pennsyl- 
vania and the prisoner at the Bar, John Jasper, 
whom you will have in charge, and a true verdict 
render according to the evidence. And so you and 
each of you do declare. 

The Court: The Clerk will proceed to read the 
indictment. 

Court Clerk: "In the Court of Oyer and Ter- 
miner and General Jail Delivery in and for the 
County of Philadelphia. April Sessions, 1914. 
County of Philadelphia, ss. The Grand Inquest of 
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, inquiring for 
the County of Philadelphia, upon their respective 
oaths and affirmations, do present, that John Jas- 
per, late of the County of Kent, United Kingdom of 
Great Britain and Ireland, on the 25th day of De- 
cember, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight 
hundred and fifty-one, at the County aforesaid, and 
within the jurisdiction of this Court, with force and 
arms, etc., in and upon the body of one, Edwin 
Drood, in the peace of said Kingdom then and there 

53 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

being, feloniously, wilfully, and of his malice afore- 
thought, did make an assault, and him, the said 
Edwin Drood, then and there feloniously, wilfully 
and of his malice aforethought, did kill and murder, 
contrary to the law and against the peace and 
dignity of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 
(Signed) John C. Bell, Attorney General." 

To this indictment the prisoner at the Bar, John 
Jasper, pleads "Not guilty," and for trial hath put 
himself upon a jury of his peers and the law of 
Pennsylvania. If you find the prisoner at the Bar, 
John Jasper, guilty, you will say so. If you find 
the prisoner at the Bar, John Jasper, not guilty, you 
will say so, and no more. Good men and true, stand 
together and hearken unto the evidence. 

The Court: The Attorney-General for the Com- 
monwealth of Pennsylvania will open for the Com- 
monwealth. 

MR. Bell : With submission to your Honor : most 
potent, brave and reverend seniors; my very noble 
and approved good jurors: this is an extraordinary 
trial scene, and as I glance around everything and 
everybody seems to have gone to the Dickens. 
(Laughter.) One circumstance moving me to say 
so is the spectacle witnessed, for the first time in 
more than a quarter of a century at the bar, of 
some of the foremost citizens of the Commonwealth 
doing jury service. (Laughter and applause.) For 
the moment, I can conjure up no reason except 
that the prisoner has demanded to be tried by a jury 
of his peers. (Laughter.) And then, ladies and 
gentlemen, I take it that your presence indicates that 
that great sympathetic soul, interest in whose vale- 
dictory story has brought us hither to-night, has 
left a very strong love in the grateful hearts of the 
English speaking race. (Applause.) With a com- 
mon lineage, language, literature and law, what 
more conclusive evidence of that comity that exists 

54 




John C. Bell 
Counsel for Prosecution 



OPENING ADDRESS OF PROSECUTION 

between the two nations could there be? Certain 
recent official utterances in Washington about in- 
volved foreign complications (pardon the anachron- 
ism) to the contrary notwithstanding. It is proven 
in this cause celebre, in which England, waiving 
extradition, has indicated her willingness and desire 
that this notorious personage should be tried in the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, before a Justice 
of her Supreme Court, sitting at nisi prius here in 
the Court of Oyer and Terminer of this County. A 
wild anachronism, to be sure (laughter), but who 
would judge a judge by his ermine? 

John Jasper, therefore, stands before you, 
charged in this Bill of Indictment with the willful, 
deliberate and premeditated murder of his nephew, 
Edwin Drood, and as Attorney-General of the 
Commonwealth, it has now become my duty to 
briefly lay before you the story of his crime, with 
special reference to the place, the prisoner's char- 
acter, the time, the motive and the incriminating 
circumstances, in order that you may listen under- 
standing^ and intelligently to the evidence as it 
shall be developed before you, item by item, until it 
fixes upon the brow of that defendant, even as in 
that primal murder, Cain's crime, the indelible and 
immutable stamp of guilt. 

And first, then, as to the place. It was in the old 
town of Cloisterham, in Kent County, the distin- 
guishing feature of which was the Cathedral, with 
its tower, and its crypt or sub-basement, around 
the walls of which were myriads of vaults in which 
the dust of the dead had been interred for centuries. 
You will probably believe, under the evidence, that 
it was in one of those ancient tombs that John 
Jasper concealed the corpse of his murdered 
nephew. 

As for the character of John Jasper, we will 
prove to you, gentlemen, that it was hypocritical — 

55 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

is hypocritical, infamous, murderous. The crimi- 
nality of Bill Sykes and Carter, and the Le Farges 
pales into insignificance before it. 

He was the organist, the leader of the choir, in 
the Cathedral, and yet we will prove to you that 
ever and anon, between the sacred services, he stole 
off, a la Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (pardon the 
anachronism) to a den of iniquity in East London, 
kept by Princess Puffer, who is here in court to- 
day, and that he there gave himself up to opiate 
debauches and gave vent to murderous mutterings 
and threats against his nephew, Edwin Drood. 

To Edwin, he was connected not only with ties 
cf blood, but he was his guardian and trustee ; stood 
to him in loco parentis and demonstrably professed 
for him the most enduring affection. Yet we will 
prove to you that he murdered him, and that the 
time was Christmas Eve. 'S blood ! Of all days in 
the year, Christmas Eve! And the motive was 
fiendish jealousy of his nephew. He entertained a 
murderous love for one Rosa Bud, a retiring little 
girl to whom Edwin Drood was betrothed, and who 
attended a school kept by Miss Twinkleton there 
in Cloisterham. Jasper gave her music lessons, and 
taking advantage of these occasions, he made secret, 
fervent love to her, subjecting her to his Svengalian 
looks and his hypnotic power until she feared and 
dreaded him. Now of his love he did not dare to 
tell a thing to Edwin. That is the motive. 

And now as to the incriminating circumstances 
that substantiate his guilt. And right here let me 
tell you that the great chief justice of our Supreme 
Court, Gibson, has declared that circumstantial evi- 
dence (and it is with such evidence that we shall 
prove his crime) is often in the concrete infinitely 
stronger — "infinitely stronger" are his words— than 
positive testimony. And given a case like this, 
where each item of the circumstantial evidence is 

56 



OPENING ADDRESS OF PROSECUTION 

inconsistent with innocence, and leads, step by step, 
to the conclusion of guilt, that conclusion is unas- 
sailable. 

Let me hastily call your attention to some of the 
essential items of this circumstantial evidence as we 
shall produce it before you. 

Now, gentlemen, when an arch fiend like this de- 
fendant contemplates a murder, he naturally thinks 
of some place wherein he can make disposition of 
the body without discovery. And so we shall prove 
to you how he maladroitly endeavored to get from 
one Durdles, a dissolute character, a stonemason, 
who is here in court to-day, the keys to this crypt or 
sub-basement, with its myriads of vaults, and how 
he clandestinely induced this man Durdles to take 
him down into that crypt at midnight, and there he 
made Durdles drunk with liquor he had taken for 
that purpose. Immediately he laid down in a 
drunken stupor, enabling Jasper to abstract the 
keys and spend several hours in the exploration of 
this crypt. And then at two o'clock in the morning, 
emerging from the crypt, we will prove to you that 
a boy named Deputy was on the watch, and he flew 
at him with demoniacal rage, and would have 
strangled him then and there, had not Durdles, 
drunk as he was, interfered. And we shall submit 
to you that that evidence is absolutely inconsistent 
with innocence. 

Now, further, when an arch fiend like Jasper 
plans a murder, he seeks to cast suspicion upon 
another, and we will prove to you how he sought to 
engender suspicion against a young man named 
Neville Landless, who is here in Court to-day, and 
who was a pupil of Canon Crisparkle, who was the 
minor Canon there at the Cathedral. How, taking 
advantage of a slight quarrel between Neville and 
Edwin, and under the pretence of acting as a peace- 
maker, he mulled a cup of wine, and fanned the 

57 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

flame of jealousy, after the boys had drunk it, into 
a white heat, and then forthwith made murderous 
accusations against Neville. 

I have not the time to give you the details of the 
story now. Neville Landless is here, and the Rev- 
erend Crisparkle, and you will hear it from their 
lips on the witness stand. Suffice to say that a 
pivotal point of this story was a reconciliation din- 
ner which the good Canon Crisparkle practically 
forced Jasper to give to these two boys, and he gave 
it on Christmas Eve. Everything passed off skill- 
fully and safely at the dinner. The boys were rec- 
onciled, and after dinner was over they walked 
down to the river, about twelve o'clock, to see a 
storm that was brewing there, and they returned, 
as Neville will tell you, to Canon Crisparkle's house, 
where Edwin bade Neville good-bye, a friendly good- 
night, and said he was going straight home to Jas- 
per's house. That was the last time he was seen 
alive. 

The next event was in the morning, eight hours or 
thereabouts, afterwards, when Jasper burst into a 
crowd of townspeople who were standing looking 
at the tower, and, panting, and half dressed, he 
demanded "Where is my nephew? Where is Neville 
Landless ? He was last seen in his company at mid- 
night. Where is Neville Landless?" And with this 
murderous accusation, forthwith a hue and cry was 
raised, and they started after Neville Landless, who 
had left on a walking trip that morning, in accord- 
ance with a plan that had been made theretofore. 
Well, they overtook him on this walking trip, and 
Jasper repeated his murderous accusations, with 
the result that Neville was placed under arrest. The 
good Canon became his sponsor. They brought him 
back before Mayor Sapsea, and there was a hear- 
ing, and he was detained, and redetained, and finally 
discharged for lack of evidence. 

58 



OPENING ADDRESS OF PROSECUTION 

Now I have reason to believe that in the develop- 
ment of this case by the cross-examination of the 
Commonwealth's witnesses, and the examination 
of the witnesses for the defence, it will be sought to 
re-engender these vile suspicions against this inno- 
cent lad, and it is proper, therefore, that I should 
say to you that in listening to that evidence you 
should remember that every item of such suspicious 
evidence, every prejudicial thing against Neville 
Landless, was heard before Mayor Sapsea, a monu- 
ment of stupidity and conceit (laughter), who is 
also in court, who was absolutely dominated by this 
wily defendant, and yet Neville Landless was re- 
leased, and discharged. Now that is a chapter of 
this accusation in this case that will inevitably re- 
bound and recoil upon this defendant. 

Now let me retrace my steps, and bid you take 
up another thread of the story. On December 23rd, 
Edwin Drood came up from London to see Rosa. 
They had been betrothed by their parents, and the 
betrothal was more or less irksome. For that reason 
they took a walk along the river, and they stopped 
under the elm trees near the Cathedral and there 
they agreed that they would break their betrothal, 
and that thereafter their relations should be that of 
brother and sister, and they kissed each other, affec- 
tionately, good-bye, under the elm tree. As they 
did so, mark you, looking up, they saw the defendant 
peering at them under the trees, and then he clan- 
destinely followed them to the gate. 

Now we will submit to you, in the light of the 
surrounding circumstances which will be developed, 
that he interpreted that kiss as the seal of their 
betrothal, and of the promise of the consummation 
of their marriage in the following May, and in fiend- 
ish jealousy that night he betook himself to Princess 
Puffer's den of iniquity in London. He returned the 
next day and the Princess Puffer followed him. It 

59 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

was twilight. She lost him, and she stopped near 
the Cathedral. And then, call it Fate, or Destiny, 
or Providence, or what you will, along came Edwin 
Drood, and she asked him for a three and sixpence, 
and he told her his name was Edwin, and she said 
to him, "Do sweethearts call it Eddie?" And he 
said, "I have no sweethearts." We will prove to 
you that Rosa always called him "Eddie," but you 
recall the engagement was broken the day before. 
Then she said to him, mark you, gentlemen, "You 
should be thankful your name ain't Ned." "Why," 
said he. "Because 'Ned' is a bad name, a threatened 
name, a dangerous name." "Oh," said he, lightly, 
"the proverb says that threatened men live long." 
"Then," said she, "Ned, wherever he may be, so 
threatened is he, even while I am speaking to you, 
dearie, he should live to all eternity." 

Gentlemen, that language could mean nothing but 
that the hand of death was upon Ned. And we will 
prove to you that the only man in all the world who 
called Edwin Drood "Ned" was Jasper. And that 
night Ned was murdered! That night Ned was 
murdered ! 

Now for another incriminating circumstance, re- 
membering that this circumstantial evidence is infi- 
nitely stronger than positive testimony. It was 
agreed between Edwin and Rosa that she would 
send for her guardian, Grewgious, and he should 
come up and tell Jasper, Edwin's guardian, of the 
broken engagement, and he came up the day after 
Christmas, or the following day, and he called to 
see Jasper at his house in the evening, and mark you 
what happened. He told him of the broken engage- 
ment, and this defendant arose from his chair, his 
face was leaden, it grew ghastly pale, great drops 
of sweat, as if bubbles of steel, appeared upon it. 
He shrieked in terror, writhed in agony, swooned 
and fell, a mass of miry clothes, upon the floor. 

60 



PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY 

Gentlemen, we will submit to you that that con- 
duct is absolutely inexplicable on any footing or 
theory of excuse, and that it stamps upon him in- 
delibly the impress of guilt. 

One other item of evidence, and I shall have done 
with this recital. We will prove to you, finally, that 
the defendant went to Princess Puffer's house in 
August last, and there, before he had whiffed the 
pipe, as well as afterwards, when the drug had 
loosed his tongue, he unguardedly confessed his 
guilt. And when we have proven the story, then, 
gentlemen, it will be up to you to vindicate the law, 
and to demonstrate that England's faith in the ad- 
ministration of justice in this Commonwealth has 
not been placed in vain. The times are out of joint. 
No one could tell what a miscarriage of justice, an 
international calamity, might lead to — perhaps to 
intervention or war. (Laughter.) Whereas the 
true verdict will stand, not only as a triumph of 
justice, but as a treaty of peace, and therefore I 
shall ask of you gentlemen, under the evidence, a 
verdict of murder in the first degree. (Applause.) 

The Court: The Court desires to announce to 
counsel that it is now half-past eight o'clock, and 
the Court will expect counsel on both sides to close 
their testimony by ten o'clock. 

Mr. Bell: Right. 

Canon Crisparkle, will you take the stand? 

Mayor Sapsea: I protest against the Canon tak- 
ing the stand, sir. I am the first citizen of Cloister- 
ham. 

Mr. Bell: Do you insist upon your prerogative, 
sir? 

Mayor Sapsea: I do, most positively. 

Mr. Bell : All right, Dogberry, take the stand. 



61 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Prosecution's Testimony — Sapsea 

(Mayor Sapsea takes the witness stand.) 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. What quadruped in the animal kingdom do 
you and Dogberry typify? 

A. Not a jackass, like counsel. 

Q. You are the Mayor of Cloisterham? 

A. I am doing the people of Cloisterham the honor 
of being their Mayor. 

Q. Did you have a preliminary hearing in which 
John Jasper and Neville Landless, and the good 
townspeople were concerned? 

A. I held such a hearing, as the Magistrate of the 
ancient Cathedral City. 

Q. Neville Landless was arrested, charged with 
the murder of Edwin Drood? 

A. I believe that he was apprehended on the high- 
way, and brought before me. 

Q. Have you any doubt about it, sir? 

A. I always have doubts until matters are proven 
to my complete satisfaction. 

Q. Look at that record, and see whether it is 
yours? 

A. You will pardon me, sir? 

Q. Do not look at the notations, please. 

A. That appears to be the record of the prelim- 
inary hearing, as it was held before me. 

Mr. Bell : I offer this record in evidence. 

The Court: Are there any objections? 

Mr. Scott : I have no objection. 

The Court : The record is accepted. 

Mr. Scott: The defence claims its right to recall 
this witness. 

Mr. Bell: You can have all you want of him. 
Enough is as good as a feast. 

Mayor Sapsea : I trust that you are through your 
feast. 

Mr. Bell : I have had enough, sir. 

62 



PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY— CRISPARKLE 

(Canon Septimus Crisparkle called to the wit- 
ness stand.) (Applause.) 

By Mr. Bell: 

Q. What is your vocation, sir. 

A. I am minor Canon of Cloisterham Cathedral. 

Q. Do you know John Jasper, and did you know 
Edwin Drood, and do you know Rosa Bud, Neville 
Landless, the Mayor of Cloisterham, and the others 
who are cloistered there? 

A. I knew them all. They were all citizens of our 
cathedral town. 

Q. Do you recall the first time that Neville 
Landless and Edwin Drood met? 

A. Yes; they met at my house on the day of the 
arrival of Neville Landless and his sister at Clois- 
terham. 

Q. They met at a dinner at your house? 

A. Yes, I gave them a little reception dinner. 

Q. We will assume the dinner is over. What 
episode, if any, happened afterwards? 

A. At the dinner? 

Q. No; afterwards, we are accelerating our pace. 
We are through the dinner. 

A. There was an unfortunate episode at the din- 
ner. Rosa Bud was singing, and she became ex- 
cited, and hysterical, and shrieked out, and stopped 
singing. She burst into tears. 

Q. Who was looking at her with a fixed, hypnotic 
gaze at the time? 

A. John Jasper. 

Q. The defendant? 

A. Yes. 

Q. And what did she say in this nervous attack? 

A. "I cannot bear this. I am frightened. Take 
me away." 

Q. Well, well. Now, Mr. Crisparkle, you doubt- 
less heard of a quarrel between Edwin and Neville, 

63 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

following this dinner, and that it was renewed at 
Jasper's house? 

A. Yes. 

Q. You were not present, however, were you? 

A. No. 

Q. As a matter of fact, however, did not Neville 
come to your house immediately afterwards, and tell 
you about it? 

A. Yes. 

Q. What did he say? 

A. He returned home much distressed and morti- 
fied. He said he had begun ill, dreadfully ill; that 
he had gone to the dinner, that he drank very little, 
but it affected him in the most sudden and strangest 
manner, and that Edwin Drood grossly insulted 
him, and he came home. 

Q. What did you do then? 

A. I talked with him. I took him to bed, and 
when I left him he sobbed. 

Q. State whether or not Jasper, the defendant, 
saw you immediately after this quarrel? 

A. Yes; he came to my house, and said that 
Neville Landless had made a murderous attack upon 
his nephew. 

Q. Well, did you make any effort to bring about a 
reconciliation between the two boys? 

A. I talked with my pupil, Neville Landless, and 
he promised me upon his word of honor as a gentle- 
man, that he would forgive and forget. 

Q. Then what did you do? 

A. I then went to John Jasper, and asked his aid 
in bringing about a reconciliation. At first he 
seemed perplexed, as if indulging in a close internal 
calculation. But later he consented, and arranged 
for a dinner for Neville Landless, his nephew, Ed- 
win Drood, and himself, on Christmas Eve. 

Q. And that was to take place when, on Christ- 
mas Eve? 

64 



PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY— CRISPARKLE 

A. On Christmas Eve, Mr. Attorney-General. 

Q. Did Neville go to the dinner? 

A. Yes ; he left my home to go to the dinner. 

Q. And where did he go the next morning? 

A. He started early on a walking trip that he had 
previously planned. 

Q. Now what happened the next morning, Christ- 
mas morning? 

A. Christmas morning I was standing at my win- 
dow, watching a cluster of townspeople who were 
looking up at the tower that had been damaged by 
a violent storm the night before, when suddenly 
John Jasper rushed into the crowd, white, half- 
dressed, and panting, and said, "Where is my 
nephew?" And I said to him "Where is your 
nephew? Is he not with you?" he said "No; he left 
last night to go down to the river with Neville Land- 
less, and has not been back. Where is Neville?" I 
then said that Neville had left on this walking trip 
in the morning, and he said "Left for a walking 
trip? Let me in; let me in." 

Q. What happened after this murderous insinua- 
tion? 

A. A hue and cry was raised, and he started after 
Neville. 

Q. Well, did you overtake him ? 

A. About eight miles out of Cloisterham. 

Q. And Jasper went with you? 

A. Jasper went with us. 

Q. And when you overtook him, what did Jasper 
say? 

A. Jasper said to him, "Where is my nephew?" 
Neville Landless replied, "Where is your nephew? 
Why do you ask me?" He said, "I ask you because 
you were the last one in his company, and he is not 
to be found." "Not to be found?" said Neville, 
aghast. I then interposed, and asked the boy to 
collect his thoughts, and I asked him when he had 

65 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

left Edwin Drood. He said they had gone down to 
the river at midnight, on the night before, to look 
at the ravages of the storm, and that they had re- 
turned in about ten minutes, and that he had left 
Edwin Drood at my door, and he said that he was 
going straight home 1 , to John Jasper. 

Q. That was about ten minutes after twelve, the 
night before? 

A. Ten minutes past twelve. 

Q. Well, now, Neville was taken into custody, 
was he? 

A. He was taken into custody. The hearing was 
before Mayor Sapsea, and I became sponsor for 
Neville Landless. 

Q. Ah! What, if anything, was said about 
searching the river there at the hearing? 

A. Mr. Jasper said that he understood that Mayor 
Sapsea suggested that the river be dragged, and its 
banks rigidly searched. 

Q. Had Mayor Sapsea made any such suggestion ? 

A. No. He put those words in his mouth. 

Q. And what happened after this? Was the river 
searched ? 

A. The river was searched for two or three days, 
and on the morning of the 28th of December I 
found a watch and shirt pin at Cloisterham Weir, 
two miles above the cathedral. 

Q. What then happened? 

A. I then took Neville Landless, and the jewelry, 
and took him immediately to Mayor Sapsea. 

Q. And who identified those articles ? 

A. John Jasper identified them as the property 
of his nephew, Edwin Drood. 

Q. And what was done after this, so far as Nev- 
ille was concerned? 

A. Neville was detained, and redetained, and later 
discharged for lack of evidence. 

66 







u 



u 



m 



& 15 
en 



PROSECUTION— CROSS-EXAMINATION 

Q. What, if anything did Jasper say to you after 
you found the watch and stick pin ? 

A. One morning while he was unrobing in the 
Cathedral, he took his diary from his pocket, and 
turned the leaves, and handed it to me, in an impres-, 
sive manner, pointing to a certain paragraph. 

Q. And what, in substance, was in that para- 
graph ? 

A. It was something like this: My dear boy is 
murdered. The discovery of his watch and shirt pin 
convinces me that he was murdered on that night, 
and that his jewelry was removed from him to pre- 
vent his identification by its means. All the delu- 
sive hopes I had founded on his separation from his 
betrothed wife, I give to the winds. They perish 
before this fatal discovery. 

The Court : I must remind counsel that it will be 
necessary to shorten the examination. Proceed. 

Cross-Examined. 
By Mr. Scott: 

Q. On the first day of Neville Landless's arrival 
at your house, you informed him of the engagement 
between Rosa Bud and Edwin Drood, didn't you? 

A. I did, sir. 

Q. He seemed to show a resentment as to this, 
and spoke of Edwin's apparent air of proprietorship 
over Rosa Bud, didn't he? 

A. He did; sir. 

Q. You were at your house when Neville Land- 
less returned, after the quarrel at Jasper's gate- 
house, weren't you? 

A. I was. 

Q. And you have told, in your examination in 
chief, his conversation. Didn't he say to you that 
he would have cut down Edwin Drood had he not 
been restrained by this defendant, John Jasper? 

A. Yes; he was very angry. 

67 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Q. And didn't he say that with such force that he 
clenched his fist and showed his anger towards the 
young man Drood? 

A. That is true. 

Q. Now, Minor Canon, some days after this you 
met Neville Landless, and his sister, Helena, along 
the banks of the river, didn't you? 

A. I did, sir. 

Q. And then you talked to young Landless about 
his conduct towards Edwin Drood? 

A. I did, sir. 

Q. You told him that he was in the wrong; that 
he was the assailant of Edwin, and it was his duty 
to apologize to Edwin, didn't you? 

A. I did, sir. 

Q. And after that interview, didn't this young 
fellow, Landless, tell you that he was in love with 
Rosa Bud? 

A. He did. 

Q. Didn't he tell you that Edwin Drood was unfit 
to be betrothed to her? 

A. In his opinion. 

Q. And didn't he say that she was being sacri- 
ficed in being betrothed to him ? 

A. He did. 

Q. He told you in his conversation that he was 
of tigerish blood, didn't he? 

A. Yes. 

Q. And he showed to you that he was of great 
temper, didn't he? 

A. Yes; at times. 

Q. In fact, Mr. Crisparkle, at your first conversa- 
tion with this young man he told you that had his 
stepfather not died in Ceylon, that he would have 
murdered him, didn't he? 

A. Yes, he made that rash statement. 

Q. Do you remember when young Landless left 

68 



PROSECUTION— CROSS-EXAMINATION 

your house to go over on Christmas Eve to John 
Jasper's home, to meet Edwin Drood? 

A. I recall the occasion. 

Q. Do you remember that he was armed with a 
heavy walking stick of iron wood ? 

A. He took the stick he had purchased to carry 
the next day. 

Q. You never again saw Landless until he was 
apprehended by the citizens, and charged with the 
disappearance of Edwin Drood, did you? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You told us that young Landless stated that 
he had been to the river with Drood the night 
before, and that he had returned with him to your 
house. Didn't you suggest that language to him 
in these words, "Neville, collect yourself." Did you 
not say this to him, "You left Mr. Jasper's last 
night, with Edwin?" 

A. Yes, I did. Jasper had told me they left to- 
gether. 

Q. And didn't you suggest to Neville also this: 
"You went down to the river together?" 

A. I did. 

Q. So that it was you who told it, and not Neville 
Landless? 
A. It was. 

Mr. Scott : That is all. 
The Court: Call the next witness. 
Mr. Bell : One moment, if the Court please. 

By Mr. Bell: 

Q. I want to call your attention to that walk 
along the river with Neville and his sister. Didn't 
he finally agree upon his word of Honor as a gentle- 
man that he would meet Edwin half way, and be- 
come reconciled? 

A. Yes; his better self asserted itself. 

Q. And wasn't it as a result of that solemn pledge 

69 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

to you that Jasper brought about this reconcilia- 
tion meeting? 

A. Yes. 

Q. What kind of a disposition had this young 
man? 

A. He was a lad who had been born in Ceylon, 
with rash temper, quick to anger, but at heart he 
was as gentle and affectionate as a child. 

Mr. Scott: I object to that answer. There is 
nothing in the record of this case to show that Nev- 
ille Landless was as gentle as a child, and I therefore 
object to that answer, and ask that it be stricken 
out. 

The Court: Nothing can be testified to in this 
except the facts reported in the book. My recollec- 
tion is that no such fact is recorded in the book, and 
therefore the question and answer may be stricken 
out. 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. Well, he showed the spirit of contrition and 
sobbed like a child when you took him to bed, didn't 
he? 

A. He did, after I had talked with him. 

Q. Now tell the court and jury what your opinion 
is as observing all that took place there in Cloister- 
ham, about the guilt or innocence of this young 
man, Neville? 

Mr. Scott: This is objected to as not being re- 
direct examination. 

Mr. Bell: It is brought out as answering his 
cross-examination. I am asking him that which is 
in the record. 

The Court : The witness can testify to that which 
the record contains. 

A. I told the dean that I believed in the perfect 
innocence of Neville Landless. 

Mr. Bell : That is all. 

Mr. Scott: No further questions. 

(Applause.) 

70 



PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY— LANDLESS 

Mr. Bell : Neville Landless. 
(Neville Landless takes the witness stand.) 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. You are the pupil of Canon Crisparkle? 

A. I am. 

Q. You are the Neville Landless to whom he re- 
ferred in his testimony a few minutes ago? 

A. I am. 

Q. You have heard that testimony, in so far as 
it refers to you. In the interest of expedition, is 
what he said true and correct? 

A. It is. I can tell you about my quarrel with 
Edwin Drood, if you wish to hear it. 

Q. You tell briefly just what your quarrel was 
with Edwin Drood, and more particularly what- 
ever the defendant, Jasper, did, in fomenting that 
quarrel. 

A. Edwin Drood and I had taken the young 
ladies home to the school that they were attending 
in the Nuns' House, and we came back, and on our 
way back I made an innocent reference to Edwin 
Drood's betrothal. He resented that, and told me 
to mind my own business. 

Q. Then you had a quarrel? 

A. I became angry. 

Q. And Jasper came up in the interest of peace, 
and he asked you to go to his house, and he would 
brew a cup of peace, a spirit cup? 

A. He did. 

Q. And you went there? 

A. We did. 

Q. What happened? Did he act as peacemaker, 
or was the quarrel renewed? 

A. The quarrel was renewed. Shortly after we 
got there the first thing that happened was that this 
Mr. Jasper threw the light on a portrait that there 
was there of Rosa Bud, and she had been the cause 
of our quarrel, and that caused irritation. And then 

71 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

in a complacent sort of way he spoke to Edwin 
Drood of the happiness that was coming to him 
through his marriage, and how Edwin was for- 
tunate. And that added to the irritation. 

Q. And then he brewed a cup and gave you a 
goblet of wine each, didn't he? 

A. He brewed a cup of mulled wine, and he gave 
us a goblet — a goblet to Edwin Drood, and a goblet 
to me. And when he brewed it there was much 
mixing, and much compounding, over by the fire- 
place, and the wine had a strange and unusual effect 
upon me. It went to my head; my face became 
suffused. And upon Edwin Drood it had the same 
effect. It went to his head, and his face became suf- 
fused. Then my voice became thick, indistinct, and 
his voice became thick and indistinct, and there 
were some more words, and he said I was not fit 
to associate with white people. I took the glass of 
wine I had, and threw the dregs in his face. 

Q. What I want to know is whether this peace- 
maker who asked you there in the interest of peace, 
interposed in any way, by word or suggestion, to 
stop this game of crimination, and recrimination 
until you actually raised your glass to throw it at 
him? 

A. No; it was he who kept the conversation on 
the tender subject, and never interfered until I 
threw the wine in his face. 

Q. Then you went home and told Canon Cris- 
parkle that you had behaved ill ; you went home and 
sobbed? 

A. Yes. 

Q. In this walk along the river, didn't you give 
your word of honor as a Christian gentleman that 
you would meet Edwin Drood half way, and become 
reconciled with him, as a result of which this recon- 
ciliation dinner took place that Canon Crisparkle 
told about? 

72 



PROSECUTION— CROSS-EXAMINATION 

A. I did, and I gave him my word of honor, and 
my most solemn promise as a Christian gentleman 
that the quarrel would be at an end when Edwin 
would meet me half way, and he did meet me half 
way, and generously and nobly. We agreed together 
to let bygones be bygones, in behalf of both of us, 
and everything was peaceable at the dinner, as 
Jasper himself, who was present, will have to admit. 

Q. So that everything went off smoothly and pleas- 
antly at this reconciliation dinner, and after it was 
over, about twelve o'clock, you and Edwin walked 
down to the river to see the storm? 

A. Yes. 

Q. And then you came back to Canon Crisparkle's 
house, and you bade him a friendly good-night, 
about ten minutes after twelve? 

A. I bade him good-night about ten minutes past 
twelve; yes. 

Q. I want you to say to this court and jury 
whether you are guilty or innocent of this crime? 

A. Absolutely innocent. 

Cross-Examined. 
By Mr. Scott: 

Q. Didn't you tell Mr. Crisparkle, when you re- 
turned back from your quarrel with Edwin Drood, 
that you were so angry at Edwin that you would 
have cut him down had you not been stopped by 
Jasper? 

A. Yes. He said I was not fit to associate with 
white men. 

Q. This conversation that you had with Cris- 
parkle along the banks of the river, when you were 
talking with him as a Christian gentleman, and giv- 
ing him your promise as a Christian gentleman, 
isn't this some of the language that you, as a Chris- 
tian gentleman, used? Speaking of Edwin Drood 
— "husband or no husband, that fellow is incapable 

73 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

of the feeling with which I am inspired towards 
Rosa Bud." 

A. I did. 

Q. And didn't you use this language also : "He is 
incapable of such feeling, and unworthy of her." 

A. I did. 

Q. And didn't you, as a Christian gentleman, 
further say, "I love her, and I despise and hate 
him?" 

A. I did. 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. And after that you had your reconciliation 
dinner, and parted friends? 

A. When he said he would meet me half way, I 
met him. 

Mr. Scott: I object— 

The Court : Call another witness. 

Mr. Bell : Come along, Rosa. 

(Rosa Bud takes the witness stand.) 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. What is your name? 

A. Rosa Bud. 

Q. How old are you? 

A. Nineteen. 

Q. Will you try to keep your voice up so the court 
and jury and assembled multitude will hear? 

A. I will try. 

Q. You are a pupil at Miss Twinkleton's school 
at Cloisterham? 

A. I was. 

Q. Did you know Edwin Drood? 

A. Yes; I have known him since we were chil- 
dren. 

Q. You and he were betrothed, weren't you? 

A. Yes; by our parents. 

Q. Will you please state by what nickname you 
called him? 

74 



PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY— ROSA BUD 

A. I always called him "Eddie." 

Q. Do you know John Jasper, the defendant 
here? 

A. Yes. He was my music master. 

Q. Miss Bud, did he ever indicate any love or in- 
fatuation for you, and if so, in what manner? 

A. When I sang, he never moved his eyes from my 
lips. When I played, he never moved his eyes from 
my hands. When he corrected me, or struck a note 
or chord, or played a passage, he himself was in 
the sounds, whispering that he pursued me as a 
lover, and commanding me to keep his secret. 

Q. Did you ever tell this to Edwin Drood ? 

A. No; I never told anyone except Helen Land- 
less, and Mr. Grewgious. 

Q. He was your guardian? 

A. My dear guardian. 

Q. Pardon me, Miss Bud, but did you ever love 
this defendant? 

A. No ; he terrified me. He haunted my thoughts 
like a dreadful ghost. I felt that I was never safe 
from him. I felt he could pass in through the wall 
when he was spoken of. 

Q. Don't be alarmed. Don't be alarmed. No one 
will hurt you. Go on, please. Go on, Rosa, please. 

A. He made a slave of me with his looks. He 
forced me to understand him without uttering a 
word. He forced me to keep silence without his 
uttering a threat. I avoided his eyes, but he obliged 
me to see them without looking at them. 

Q. Did he ever exercise this Svengali-like influ- 
ence over you in public? 

A. Yes. Once, after dinner, when we had been 
dining at Mr. Crisparkle's. 

Q. That was the instance that Canon Crisparkle 
referred to on the stand, and what he said was cor- 
rect, was it? 

A. It was. 

75 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Q. He looked at you with this fixed hypnotic 
gaze, did he? 

A. He did. 

Q. Do you recall the last time you saw Eddie 
alive? 

A. I do. 

Q. Will you relate to the jury the time, and the 
circumstances, just how it happened. 

A. Eddie came down from London, on December 
23d, 1851. We took a walk together that afternoon. 
We agreed to break our betrothal, and to change our 
relations to brother and sister from then. 

Q. Where did you come to this agreement? 

A. Under the elm tree in the Cathedral Close, on 
the afternoon of December 23d, 1851. 

Q. And then you tenderly and affectionately 
kissed each other good-bye, did you not? 

A. We did. 

Q. And what, if anything, did Edwin say to you 
just at that moment, as you were making this affec- 
tionate farewell? 

A. He cautioned me: "Rosa, don't look around. 
Did you see Jack?" I said "No; where?" He said 
"Under the trees. He saw us take leave of each 
other." 

Q. And what then happened? 

A. I hurried Eddie on until we passed out of the 
gatehouse into the street, and then I asked "Is he 
behind ? You can look without seeming to. Has he 
followed us?" He answered, "No — yes, he has." 
Before I went into the Nuns' House I gave Eddie a 
wide- wondering look, as much as to say "Don't you 
understand ?" 

Q. This Nuns' House was Miss Twinkleton's 
school? 

A. Yes. That was the last time I saw Eddie. 

Q. The last time you ever saw him alive, eh? 

76 



PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY— ROSA BUD 

Well, when was the next time you saw this defend- 
ant here? 

A. At the hearing before Mayor Sapsea. 

Q. And when was the next time you saw him, 
and the last time ? 

A. Late in the afternoon of June 29th, 1852. He 
called on me at the Nuns' House. I received him in 
the garden, because I was afraid to be with him in 
the house. Miss Twinkleton was at a picnic, and 
the girls had all gone to their homes. 

Q. Did he state why he called to see you ? 

A. He said he wanted to know when I would take 
up my music lessons again, and I told him I was 
resolved to leave off. 

Q. What, if anything else, did he say to you on 
this visit? 

A. He told me over and over again that — that he 
loved me madly, that he had loved me all the time 
Eddie was alive, that he had worshipped in torment 
for years my picture that Eddie had sketched and 
given him; that he loved me during the distasteful 
work of the day, and through the wakeful misery of 
the night. 

Q. And what else did he say, Rosa? 

A. He asked me whether he had not kept his 
secret loyally while Eddie was alive, and I answered 
him, with indignation, "You were false, sir, as you 
are now. You were false to him hourly and daily. 
You have made my life unhappy by your pursuit of 
me. I was afraid to open Eddie's generous eyes. I 
was afraid to tell the truth about you to Eddie," and 
I told him, "You are a bad, bad, bad man." 

Q. And what did he insinuate about Neville 
Landless to you? 

A. Well, he insinuated that Neville was in love 
with me, and he said "Judge for yourself whether 
any other admirer of yours shall love you and live, 

77 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

whose life is in my hands. Young Landless stands 
in deadly peril." 

Q. And he referred to the gallows, even as re- 
spects an innocent man, didn't he? 

A. He said "Circumstances may so accumulate, 
even against an innocent man, that, sharpened, 
directed, and pointed, they may convict him." 

Q. And he was talking about Neville Landless 
at that time, wasn't he, and his affection for you? 

A. Yes, he was. 

Q. What did he say about his love for his 
nephew? 

A. He said that his love for me was so mad, that 
had the love he bore his dear lost boy been one silken 
thread less strong, he would have swept even him 
from my path when I favored him. 

Q. Did he command you to keep this a secret, and 
that he would pursue you to the death, and nothing 
should ever come between you? 

A. Yes, he did. He said I must not tell a word 
of it to anyone, that if I did, it would bring down 
a blow as certainly as night followed day. 

Q. This conversation was in the rose garden 
where the sun dial was, in front of the Nuns' House, 
wasn't it? 

A. It was, sir. 

Q. And then you were so frightened, that in your 
terror you fled to your guardian, Grewgious, in 
London, didn't you? 

A. Yes. 

Q. One last question, Miss Bud. Whom did you 
suspect as being responsible for Edwin's murder. 

The Court: Is that question objected to? 

Mr. Scott: We object to the question. 

Mr. Bell: It is in the record. I stand upon the 
record. 

78 



PROSECUTION— CROSS-EXAMINATION 

The Court: The court will not permit the ques- 
tion until the record is produced. It can be admitted 
later. 

Mr. Bell : Now is the accepted time. 

The Court : No argument now. 

Mr. Scott : We must admit that this suspicion is 
in the record. 

The Court : The court has ruled, and that is the 
end of the matter. 

Mr. Bell: Do you admit that it is part of the 
record that she suspected this defendant? 

Mr. Scott: Ask the judge. 

cross-examined. 
By Mr. Scott: 

Q. Did Mr. Jasper, at any time before the dis- 
appearance of Mr. Drood, express to you any words 
of love? 

A. He did not. 

Q. The first time that Mr. Jasper expressed his 
love for you was some six months after Drood's dis- 
appearance, and after his engagement with you had 
been broken? 

A. Actions speak louder than words. 

Q. I ask, may it please your Honor, that the ques- 
tion and answer be stricken out. Answer the ques- 
tion as it is in the book. 

Mr. Bell : Answer it as it is in the book, but not 
as counsel says. He is not running this trial. 

(Question repeated by stenographer as follows: 
"The first time that Mr. Jasper expressed his love 
for you was some six months after Drood's disap- 
pearance, and after his engagement with you had 
been broken?") 

Q. Answer the question yes, or no. 

Mr. Bell: With an explanation. 

The Court : The witness will answer the question 
yes or no. 

79 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Mr. Bell: Then may she give the explanation 
according to the record? 

Mr. Scott: Answer the question yes or no. Did 
he ever express his love to you in words until six 
months after you had broken the engagement with 
Edwin Drood? 

A. He did not. 

Mr. Bell: I now ask the witness whether or not 
she did not suspect this defendant of the murder. 

The Court : The Court has examined the record, 
and finds it is proper for the witness to answer. 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. Whom did you suspect of this crime? 

A. I suspected Mr. Jasper had made away with 
him. 
By Mr. Scott: 

Q. You are rather a nervous young lady, aren't 
you? 

Mr. Bell : She is not used to this. 

A. If anybody makes me nervous. 

(Durdles takes the witness stand.) 

The Court: Let the witness be affirmed. 

Court Clerk : Put your hand on the book. 

You do declare that you will true answers make 
to such questions as will be put to you touching the 
matter now before the court, and so you do declare. 

(Witness nods affirmatively.) 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. What is your name? 

A. Durdles, sir. 

Q. What is your first name? 

A. Well, sir, it is so long since I heard it, I hardly 
know what it is, sir. 

Q. Well, without giving your first name, then, 
will you tell me whether you know this man Jasper? 

A. Yes, we have had a drink or two together; we 
have, sir. 

80 



PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY— DURDLES 

Q. Where did you have that drink? 

A. At Mayor Sapsea's, sir. 

Q. And the Mayor, I suppose, took a little one 
too? 

A. Yes — not a little one, sir; not a little one. 

Q. What did this man here, Jasper, interest him- 
self in when you were there at Sapsea's? 

A. Well, sir, Mr. Jasper, the prisoner there, 
wanted to get the crypt keys which I carried in my 
bag, in my jacket, sir. 

Q. He did? 

A. Yes ; and the key to Mrs. Sapsea's or Mr. Sap- 
sea's vault, which I had in my bundle, sir. 

Q. Ah, yes! Well, now he tried that while you 
were at Mayor Sapsea's? 

A. Yes. 

Q. And then you left and went home, didn't you? 

A. Well, I left, sir. But I didn't go right home, 
sir. I had to go out and have another drink. 

Q. And then you stopped and looked through that 
resting place of the ghosts, called the cemetery, 
didn't you? 

A. Well, sir, I felt a bit weary, and I leaned up 
against the iron fence of the burial ground, sir. 

Q. And who came along about that time? 

A. And Mr. Jasper came along, and he wanted 
to go home with me, and wanted me to let him carry 
the bundle, sir. 

Q. He was chivalric enough to want to take you 
home, was he? 

A. Yes. 

Q. Were you able to go home alone? You had 
gone, once or twice, I suppose, full and otherwise? 

A. Mostly otherwise, sir. 

Q. Well, he was interested in carrying your 
bundle, wasn't he? This chivalric Jasper! 

A. Yes. 

81 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Q. Did you let him carry it? 
A. Yes. 

Q. And what did he ask you about the crypt on 
the way home, when he was so generously carrying 
your bundle containing the keys? 

A. He asked me, sir, if there was anything new 
in the crypt, and I said "Do you mean anything 
old, sir?" I says, "It ain't a spot for novelty, Mr. 
Jasper." 

Q. He asked you if you would not take him down 
there some night about midnight, didn't he? 
A. Yes. 

Q. Some moonlight expedition down there in the 
sub-basement? 

A. Yes. He said that Mayor Sapsea suggested 
that he write a book, and he wanted to go up in the 
tower, and — 

Q. This was another occasion in which he insinu- 
ated that Mayor Sapsea was responsible for his sug- 
gestions ? 

A. Well, he said Mr. Sapsea said so. 

Q. Did you go down in the crypt with him? 

A. Yes; some nights afterwards. 

Q. And what did you take with you — what did he 
take with him? 

A. We went down in the crypt. I opened the 
narrow door, and we went down, and we went up the 
stairs into the tower, and on the way up there Mr. 
Jasper gave me a bottle, sir, and I gave him the 
bundle. 

Q. And what was in the bottle? 

A. Something good, sir; something good. 

Q. Well, you took a swig or two, did you? 

A. Yes. 

Q. How many? 

A. Oh, I could not count them, sir ; I could not. 

82 



PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY— DURDLES 

Q. Well, you emptied the bottle, didn't you? It 
was a wicker bottle, was it not? 

A. Yes. 

Q. He did not take any? 

A. No ; he said it was extra good, extra strong. 

Q. He brought it for your special purpose, eh? 

A. Yes. 

Q. After you emptied the bottle, what happened? 

A. When we came down into the crypt again I 
felt kind of weary, and I wanted to take forty winks, 
and then, sir, I passed away. (Laughter). 

Q. You laid down by one of the pillars there, and 
dreamed — you dreamed you dwelt in marble halls? 

A. Well, I dreamed, but I cannot exactly say it 
was about marble halls. 

Q. What was it about? 

A. I dreamed that somebody had hold of me, and 
I felt kind of disturbed, and I felt something fall 
on the floor, and something groping about, and then 
I got awake, and I found one of my keys lying on 
the crypt floor, sir. 

Q. And how long had you been in this beautiful 
dream, that you said was forty winks long? 

A. Two o'clock was striking — two o'clock in the 
morning, sir. 

Q. And where was Jasper when you awakened? 

A. I don't know, sir — oh, he was walking up 
and down, and I asked him why he didn't awaken 
me, and he said he did try to awaken me. 

Q. Well, now, after you started for home at two 
o'clock in the morning, where did you and Jasper 
go? 

A. We came out of the crypt, sir, and when we 
got on the outside, we bumped into Deputy, sir. 

Q. That is, this boy they called Deputy? 

A. Yes. 

Q. Then what did Mr. Jasper say? 

A. Well, when we bumped into him Mr. Jasper 

83 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

says, "What, has that boy devil been watching 
there?" Then he grew violent — furious, sir. Then 
he looked like the very old Devil himself, sir. 

Q. Go ahead, sir. 

A. He said "Why, I shall shed the blood out of 
that impish wretch — that is what I will do." I said, 
"Don't— don't hurt the boy, Mr. Jasper. Recollect 
yourself." And that was all there was. 

Q. He was about to strangle him in his demoni- 
acal rage, was he? 

A. Yes. Then sir, I went home to get a drink. 

Q. And the little boy had done nothing except 
stay there and watch, sir? 

A. That was all, sir. 

cross-examined. 
By Mr. Scott: 

Q. When Jasper got your keys at Sapsea's house, 
you just gave them to him that he might weigh the 
keys in his hand, is that not so? 

A. Yes. 

Q. And he gave you your keys back? 

A. Yes. 

Q. And you put them, one in your blouse, and one 
in your bundle, and went your way? 

A. Yes. 

Q. And it was later in the evening when you 
were leaning against the iron fence, or railing, that 
Jasper came up? 

A. Yes. 

Q. You were pretty drunk? 

A. Some, sir. 

Q. And Jasper offered to take you home? 

A. Yes; he wanted to go home with me. 

Q. And wasn't the reason for him having your 
bundle, that you handed it to him, — that you put ft 
on the ledge, so that you might take your hammer, 
and show him how you tapped for the "old un." 

84 



PROSECUTION— CROSS-EXAMINATION 

A. Yes; he asked me for the bundle. He asked 
me twice for the bundle, and I gave it to him. 

Mr. Bell: He seemed very much interested in 
that bundle. 

By Mr. Scott: 

Q. And you went on home and carried the bundle 
(that is, the one under your arm), with you? 

(Laughter.) 

A. Yes. 

Q. Now then, it was some considerable time after 
that, that you and Jasper went to the tower? 

A. Yes. 

Q. Now it is not an unusual thing for your visi- 
tors to bring you a bottle of liquor, is it? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. In fact you have already said that strangers 
who bring liquor for two are once welcome, and who 
bring liquor for twice two are twice welcome? 

A. Yes ; that is right ; that is right, sir. 

Q. When you went to the tower, of course you 
took this wicker bottle of rum — you, yourself, didnjt 
you? 

A. No, sir ; Mr. Jasper took it. 

Q. Didn't Jasper give it to you? 

A. Oh, yes, sir ; yes, sir. 

Q. And then he carried your bundle? 

A. Yes. 

Q. And as you went into your drunken sleep, 
down in the crypt, your bundle was in your posses- 
sion, was it not? 

A. No, sir; Mr. Jasper carried the bundle. 

Q. When you awoke from your sleep, was the 
key that was lying alongside of you the tomb key 
or the crypt key? 

A. The crypt key. 

Q. It was not the Sapsea tomb key, was it? 

A. No, sir. 

85 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Q. You went home then, from your sleep? 

A. Yes. 

Q. Now having a dream there in the crypt, on 
that occasion, was not the first time you had a 
dream ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Christmas Eve before, you had a drunken 
dream that you heard the ghost of a shriek, and the 
ghost of the howl of a dog, didn't you? 

A. So they said, sir. 

Q. Well, you, yourself, said it, didn't you? You 
told that to Jasper, didn't you? 

A. Yes. 

(Applause.) 

(Princess Puffer takes the witness stand.) 

The Witness: Oh, my lungs, my lungs is weak. 
My lungs is weak. Oh, my poor head. 

By Mr. Bell: 

Q. What is your name ? 

A. Why, dearie, they calls me "Her Royal High- 
ness, the Princess Puffer." Oh my poor lungs is 
weak ; oh, my lungs is wore away to cabbage nets. 

Q. Where do you live, Princess? 

A. Live? In London, near the dock, dearie. But 
business is slack, is slack. Oh, dear me. 

Q. What is your business? 

A. I'll be honest with you, first and last. Its 
opium, and its a human creature, that you can 
always hear what can be said against it, but seldom 
what can be said in its praise. Oh, my lungs is 
weak, my lungs is bad. 

Q. Well, now, quiet yourself, dearie. 

(Laughter.) Do you know the prisoner? 

A. Know him ? Better than all the reverend par- 
sons put together know him. Ah, I have mixed 

86 




-■- 



rt as 



PROSECUTION'S— PRINCESS PUFFER 

many a smoke for you, first and last, haven't I, 
Chuckey? Ah, ha! ha! 

Q. Where did you meet the prisoner? 

A. In my place, m London, dearie, where I mixes 
my opium. I have got the real recipe for mixing 
the pipe, haven't I, dearie? Ah! 

Q. Princess, when did you see him last? 

A. I saw him last singing and chanting in the 
cathedral in Cloisterham, in August, 1852. 

Q. What were you doing in Cloisterham? 

A. I went to find him. I could not miss him 
twice. 

Q. What do you mean by "twice"? 

A. I had followed him once before, dearie. Yes, 
it was while waiting for him that a young gentle- 
man gave me the three and sixpence. 

Q. What was the young gentleman? Who was 
he? 

A. His name was Edwin, dearie. 

Q. How do you know the young man's name was 
Edwin? 

A. I asked him and he told it me. I only asked 
him two questions: What was his Christian name, 
and if he had a sweetheart. He said "Edwin," and 
he hadn't. 

Q. Now you tell of your meeting with this young 
man, with Edwin. 

A. Well, dearie, I was sitting by the Cathedral 
gate in Cloisterham on Christmas Eve, when a 
young man bent over me, kindly like, and said "Are 
you ill?" "No, dearie," says I, "Oh, but my lungs 
is weak. Oh, dearie," says I, "Give me three and six- 
pence, and I will go back to London and trouble 
no one," says I. "But I am in business and it is 
slack, it is slack." He looked closely at me, and he 
said "Do you eat opium?" "Smoke it," says I. 
"Ah, but give me the three and six, dearie, and I 
will tell you something." Well, he counts out the 

87 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

money in my hand, and then I says "Hark 'ee, young 
gentleman, what is your Christian name?" 
"Edwin," he said. "Edwin, Edwin — is the short of 
that name 'Eddie' " says I. "Oh, it is sometimes 
so called," says he. "Don't sweethearts call it so?" 
says I. "How should I know," says he. "Haven't 
you a sweetheart, upon your soul?" says I. "None," 
says he. "But tell me — there is something you were 
going to tell me." "Well, then, whisper: you be 
thankful that your name ain't Ned." "Why," says 
he. "Because it is a bad name to have just now," 
says I, "a dangerous name, a threatened name." 
"Ah, the proverb says," he says, "that the threatened 
man lives long." "Then, Ned," says I, "so threat- 
ened is he, wherever he may be, while I am talking 
to you now, he should live to all eternity." Oh, my 
lungs. 

Q. And what did you do then, Princess? 

A. Oh, dearie, I said, "Bless you, and thank you 
for the three and sixpence." I went and spent the 
night at the traveler's lodging house. Oh, my poor 
head. 

Q. Well, now, steady yourself, Princess, and tell 
me when you next saw Jasper? 

A. The following August, in my place in London, 
where I mixed the opium. 

Q. And did he have a talk with you? 

A. He did, dearie. 

Q. And what did he say? 

A. Well, he threw himself upon the bed, and he 
told me to get it ready. 

Q. You mean the opium pipe? 

A. Yes, the opium pipe, dearie. 

Q. And so you mixed it, did you? 

A. I mixed it, and while I was getting it ready, 
he talked to me, and he talked a lot before he got 
under the influence, dearie. 

88 



PROSECUTION— CROSS-EXAMINATION 

Q. He did? And what did he say? 

A. He says "Suppose you had something in your 
mind, something you were going to do, should you 
do it in your fancy while you were lying here doing 
this?" And I said "Over and over again, dearie." 
"Just like me," says he. "I did it over and over 
again. I have done it hundreds and thousands of 
times in this very room." "Ah, it is to be hoped it 
was pleasant to do, dearie," says I. "It was pleas- 
ant to do," says he. "It was a journey, a difficult 
and dangerous journey, a perilous and hazardous 
journey, over abysses where a slip would mean 
destruction." "Is that the journey you have been 
away upon," says I. "That is the journey," says he, 
glaring at me, and then he raised to his feet, and 
says, "Time and place are both at hand," says he. 
"And a fellow traveler too, dearie," says I. "How 
could the time and place be both at hand unless the 
fellow traveler was? Hark," says he, "the journey's 
made. It is over. Oh, I have done it so many 
times, here in this room, through such vast expanses 
of time that when it was really done it seemed not 
worth the doing, it was done so soon." "So soon," 
says I, "Dearie?" "Yes, that's what I said to you. 
It has been too short and easy ; no struggle, no con- 
sciousness of peril, no entreaty," and with that he 
falls back upon the bed. Oh, my lungs. 

Q. Thank you, Princess, thank you. 
A. Oh, you are welcome. 

MR. Bell: Cross-examine. Not crossly examine. 

cross-examined. 
By Mr. Scott: 

Q. How long have you been an opium fiend? 
A. It was long — a good many years. I cannot 
remember how long. 

Q. And before you became an opium fiend you 

89 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

were Heavens-hard drunk for sixteen years, weren't 
you? 

A. Yes, I was, but I took to opium because it 
didn't do me so much harm. 

Q. Those who frequent your den are usually 
Chinamen, Knifers, and Lascars, aren't they? 

A. Yes;» I live along the docks, and so I get them. 

Q. You are a beggar, aren't you? 

A. I sometimes ask for a penny here and there. 

Q. Now in reference to these mutterings of this 
defendant when he was in your opium den, before 
he said a word to you about a journey, he had 
started to smoke his opium pipe, hadn't he? 

A. Oh, he had taken just a few whiffs. 

Q. And you filled his second pipe of opium before 
he started to describe his journey. Isn't that so? 

A. Oh, yes; but I have a way of mixing it. I 
wanted him to talk to me. He thought it was not 
so potent because he could not get under the influ- 
ence, and so I arg'y'd with him : "No ; it is just the 
same, dearie, only you have gotten used to taking 
it now," I said. Ah, but I had learned how to make 
him talk. I had learned how,— giving him a little 
at a time. 

The Court: Proceed. 
By Mr. Scott: 

Q. But you did get him under the influence of 
opium, didn't you? 

A. Oh, yes, yes ; I always did that. 

Q. And his eyes were filmy, sometimes closed, 
and sometimes opened? 

A. Yes; that is the way the opium works. 

Q. He continued under the influence of opium, 
though you were attempting, by filling his pipe and 
arousing him, to make him talk. Is that not so? 

A. Yes ; I kept shaking him to make him talk. I 
wanted to hear it, and I heard it; I heard it. 

Q. And finally he came under the influence of 

90 



PROSECUTION'S TESTIMONY — GREWGIOUS 

opium so that he was in a stupor, and you were 
unable to arouse him? 

A. Yes, after I had heard all I wanted to. 

Q. Have you told us all you heard on that occa- 
sion? 

A. Oh, I might have heard a few other things. I 
guess I told you the important things. 

Mr. Scott: That is all. 

The Court: Proceed. Proceed. 

The Witness: Thank you, dearie. I am glad to 
get through with this. I thank you. 

(Grewgious takes the witness stand.) 
By Mr. Bell : 

Q. Well, what is your vocation, sir? 

A. Being an angular man, I may say I am a solici- 
tor. 

Q. Angular, but not crooked, I suppose, sir? 

A. Angular refers to the disposition. Crooked 
likewise refers to the disposition, in some lawyers. 

Q. For the defence? 

A. Not always, sir. 

Q. Where do you live? 

A. Staple Inn, Holborn, London. 

Q. You are the guardian of Rosa Bud, aren't 
you? 

A. I am, sir. 

Q. You of course knew Edwin Drood? 

A. I did, sir. 

Q. You knew that he and Rosa were betrothed, 
didn't you? 

A. I did, sir. 

Q. They were betrothed by the wills of their 
parents ; in their last wills, weren't they? 

A. That is so, sir. 

Q. Now I want to direct your attention to a visit 
you made to Cloisterham on the day after Christ- 

91 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

mas, or the following day. You made that visit, 
didn't you? 

A. I did, sir. 

Q. At whose instance did you go up to Cloister- 
ham? 

A. At the instance of my ward. 

Q. Rosa Bud? 

A. Yes. 

Q. Did she ask you to convey a message to this 
defendant? 

A. She did. 

Q. Did you do so? 

A. I did. 

Q. You called at Jasper's rooms on the evening 
of December 27th? 

A. I did. 

Q. Now tell the court and jury, without further 
inquiry from me, for you are an intelligent witness, 
just what happened. 

A. I entered the apartment of the prisoner, unan- 
nounced. He was in his easy chair. His clothing 
was disarranged. It was covered with mud. I 
spoke to him of the strange disappearance, and after 
that I told him I had surprising news, news that 
would surprise him, and he turned to me without 
a word, and he moved in his chair, and groaned, 
and I said to him, "Do you want me to wait until 
the morning," and his reply was, "Go ahead," and 
I started slowly to tell him. I started slowly to tell 
him, because I wanted to mark the effect upon him 
of what I had to say. I told him that my ward 
and his nephew had determined not to marry; to 
break their engagement. His hands — 

Q. Then you told him they had broken it on the 
evening of December 23rd, didn't you? 

A. I did, sir. 

Q. Now what happened when you told him this? 

92 






OPENING ADDRESS FOR DEFENSE 

A. He grabbed the chair with his hands, his face 
grew ghastly, and his lips were white and quivering, 
a leaden pallor came over his face, and bubbles of 
perspiration, like drops of steel, came out on his 
cheeks. He arose from his chair with a writhing 
motion, he gasped, he threw back his head, and fell 
with a terrible shriek upon the floor, a miry mass 
of clothes. 

Q. And this was what happened when you simply 
told him that Edwin and Rosa had broken their 
engagement on the evening of December 23rd. 

A. It is so. 

NO CROSS-EXAMINATION. 



Mr. Bell: The Commonwealth rests. 
The Court : The Commonwealth has now closed. 
The Court announces a recess for five minutes. 



(After Recess.) 

The Court: The Court will now be in order. 
Counsel for the defence will open to the jury. 

Mr. Woodin : 

You have listened to the case of the prosecution 
in their attempt to prove the prisoner at the bar 
guilty of the crime of murder. Although under the 
evidence as presented the defense would be justified 
in asking for a verdict of not guilty, without the 
presentation of any further testimony, we desire 
to give you, gentlemen, the fullest possible oppor- 
tunity for inquiry into all the circumstances of this 
case, and to that end we shall place the defendant 
himself upon the stand. 

In order that his testimony, and that of those 
who shall testify on his behalf, shall be given proper 
effect I wish to suggest to you that while you see 
the prisoner in the dock, a place of shame, while 
you have heard an indictment charging him with 
murder, while there may be passages in the official 

93 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

record which might, to a prejudiced mind, seem to 
throw some suspicion on the prisoner, nevertheless, 
I ask you to remember that this defendant comes 
upon the stand as a witness, presumably innocent; 
and I shall ask you to remove from your minds any 
residuum of prejudice which may remain there 
because of the circumstances surrounding this trial 
up to the present time. 

Invective and accusation are not argument, and 
as one of the witnesses for the prosecution aptly 
said, "Circumstances may accumulate so strongly 
even gainst an innocent man, that directed, sharp- 
ened, and pointed, they may slay him." It is within 
the bounds of possibility that anyone, however in- 
nocent, might occupy the position in which John 
Jasper is now placed, and I shall ask you to con- 
sider his testimony with that possibility in mind. 
We present to you, therefore, in John Jasper, a man 
presumably innocent, a man of intelligence, a man 
of morbid sensibility, a man upon whom his myriad 
misfortunes so preyed that he felt himself obliged 
to resort to the use of an opiate to keep himself 
from being driven utterly mad. A man bowed 
down and broken by a grief we can hardly measure, 
as a result of his loss of one for whom his love has 
ever remained constant and does so remain to this 
day. 

I shall ask you to keep in mind that we are not 
here to prove the angelic purity of the accused. We 
are not here to prove that he had not, as which of 
us has not, unworthy aims and unfortunate im- 
pulses. We are not here to contrast unfavorably his 
character and life with that, let us say, of Canon 
Crisparkle; but we are here to say to you and to 
prove by our evidence that this man is not, and 
could not be, guilty of the crime of murder, upon all 
the evidence which has been, and will be, submitted 
for your consideration. 

94 




Miss Sarah Evans 

as 

Mrs. Tope 



DEFENSE— MRS. TOPE'S TESTIMONY 

We shall show you by other witnesses the reputa- 
tion of this defendant as well as the reputation of 
that "child-like" individual whom his fond tutor, 
Canon Crisparkle, has done so much to protect. We 
shall show you that the so-called suspicious circum- 
stances brought forward by the prosecution in their 
monstrous persecution of this defendant are ex- 
plainable as most ordinary and common place. We 
shall show you these thing's in order that your 
verdict of "Not Guilty" may stand as a rebuke to 
those who would seek to take advantage of the unfor- 
tunate and persecute the innocent. 

The Court: Call a witness and proceed expedi- 
tiously. 

Defendant's Evidence. 

(Mrs. Tope takes the witness stand.) 

By Mr. Scott: 

Q. You are the wife of the verger at Cloister- 
ham? 

A. I am. 

Q. You and your husband keep the gatehouse 
there, don't you ? 

A. Yes; we both kept the gatehouse. 

Q. Jasper lives with you? 

A. He is my lodger. 

Q. Of course you know Mr. Jasper? 

A. Oh, I know him very well. 

Q. You have known him for sometime, I under- 
stand? 

A. I have known him quite a number of years. 

Q. Do you know other people who know him at 
Cloisterham ? 

A. Everyone, nearly, in Cloisterham, knows him. 

Q. What is his reputation for peace and quiet- 
ness? 

A. He is a quiet, peaceable man. He never loves 
any noise or trouble. 

95 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Q. You knew his nephew, Edwin Drood? 

A. I knew his nephew well. 

Q. What was the relationship? 

A. Of friendliness between the uncle and nephew. 
The uncle was very careful of the health of his 
nephew. He was always looking after his comfort. 
He would look at his feet, even, to see if his shoes 
were not damp, and take such trouble with him 
that Edwin said he must not mollycoddle him so 
much. 

Q. Do you remember the evening of December 
27th, 1851? 

A. I do. 

Q. Did you see Mr. Jasper that night? 

A. Yes; I saw him that night. 

Q. That was two days after the disappearance 
of his nephew, Edwin Drood, wasn't it? 

A. It was. 

Q. What was Mr. Jasper's appearance when you 
saw him? 

A. He was in a swoon on the floor, where he had 
fallen when he was told about the estrangement of 
his nephew. 

Q. When he was told of the engagement being 
broken between Rosa Bud and Edwin? 

A. Yes. 

Q. Who was there telling him that? 

A. Mr. Grewgious was there. 

Q. When Jasper lay there on the floor, collapsed, 
what was Grewgious doing? 

A. Grewgious was sitting there looking at him, 
just quite unconcerned. 

Q. What had been Mr. Jasper's condition before 
his collapse, as to physical strength? 

A. Well, he had not eaten anything for a whole 
day. He would not eat anything in the morning; 
he would not eat any dinner, and I told him that 

96 



DEFENSE— CROSS-EXAMINATION 

he would have no strength unless he would eat 
something. 

Q. He had been engaged for two days, seeking 
along the banks of the river for his nephew, Edwin, 
hadn't he? 

A. Yes ; he had been out all that time. 

Q. You say his clothes were covered with mud. 
He had every appearance of exhaustion, hadn't he? 

A. Yes; he seemed very much exhausted. 

cross-examined. 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. Madam, you spoke about the reputation of 
Jasper for peace and quiet there in Cloisterham, 
didn't you? 

A. Yes. 

Q. What do you know about these visits he made 
to London, to Princess Puffer's den of iniquity? 

Mr. Scott : That is objected to. There is nothing 
in the record within the knowledge of this witness 
as to this den of iniquity. 

Mr. Bell : It is to test her credibility. 

The Court: If she knows of the visits, she may 
testify; if she does not know, she will say so. 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. Do you know anything of these visits of 
Jasper, the defendant, to Princess Puffer's opium 
den in East London? 

A. I know nothing about his visits there. 

Q. You never heard of his going there? 

A. I never heard of his going there. 

Q. So that your knowledge of his reputation for 
peace and quiet is confined to the confines of Clois- 
terham ? 

A. That is all the place I lived. But of course he 
was there, and I knew what his reputation was 
there. 

97 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Q. In that little community. Well, we will con- 
cede that. 

(Laughter.) 

The Court: Any other questions? 

Mr. Bell: I was just thinking, — but that will do, 
Mrs. Tope. 

(Helena Landless takes the witness stand.) 

Mr. Scott: This is an adverse witness, and I 
therefore claim, on behalf of the defendant, the 
right to cross-examine. 

Mr. Bell: I do not think this is an adverse wit- 
ness. This little stage play does not signify much. 

The Court: We will see whether the witness is 
adverse or not. Proceed with the examination. 

Mr. Bell: Do not prejudge the matter, counselor. 

By Mr. Scott: 

Q. What is your relation to Neville Landless? 

A. I am his twin sister. 

Q. Miss Landless, did you have an interview with 
your brother immediately preceding the dinner at 
John Jasper's on the Christmas Eve of 1851? 

A. He called at the Nuns' House on the way to 
the dinner. 

Q. Was he armed with a heavy walking staff 
made of iron-wood? 

A. He had a cane, which he said he intended to 
use on a walking trip the next day. 

Mr. Bell: Don't be alarmed, young lady. No- 
body will hurt you. 

(Laughter.) 

Q. Did he express to you his reluctance in going 
to the dinner at Jasper's house to there meet his 
enemy, Drood? 

Mr. Bell: That is objected to. 

The Court: The objection is overruled. The 
witness will proceed. 

98 



DEFENSE— HELENA LANDLESS 

A. He spoke of his reluctance to go to the dinner, 
and said he wished he were not going; that he did 
not like to do it. 

Q. Did you watch your brother as he went down 
to the entrance of the gate-house? 

A. I stood at the Nuns' House and watched him. 
He walked down to the entrance of the gate-house. 
He passed it several times. Finally he turned 
rapidly, and went in. 

Q. Miss Landless, do you remember the conversa- 
tion between your brother and Mr. Crisparkle on 
the banks of the river at Cloisterham? 

A. I do. 

Q. Did not Mr. Crisparkle say that your brother 
was in the wrong, and the assailant of Edwin 
Drood at Jasper's house, the night of your arrival 
at Cloisterham? 

A. He did, but Neville was provoked. 

Q. Didn't your brother Neville, refuse to make 
amends to Edwin? 

A. Yes; but isn't there a difference between sub- 
mission to a generous spirit, and submission to a 
base and trivial one? 

Q. Didn't your brother clench his fists when he 
refused to make these concessions? 

Mr. Bell: Gently leading, I suggest, your Honor. 

Mr. Scott : This is an adverse witness to us. The 
evidence is against her own twin brother. 

The Court: The question will be permitted. 

Mr. Bell: Will your Honor grant me an excep- 
tion? 

The Witness: Oh, must I answer? 

The Court : The Court sympathizes with the em- 
barrassment of the witness, but the question is a 
proper one. 

Mr. Bell : Well, it will be answered. 
By Mr. Scott: 

Q. Tell the exact words that your brother said. 

99 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

A. He said "The plain trouble is, I am still as 
angry, when I recall that night, as I was that night." 

Q. Didn't your brother, Neville, then confess to 
Crisparkle that he loved Rosa Bud, and had ill will 
against Drood upon her account? 

A. He admired Miss Bud very much. 

Q. What else did he say? 

A. He said that he could not bear to see her met 
with deceit and indifference. 

Q. Go on, what else? 

A. That she was being sacrificed in being be- 
stowed upon Edwin. 

Q. What else did he say? Answer the question. 
What else did he say? 

Mr. Bell: Oh, put the words in her mouth, if 
you want to. 

(Laughter.) 
By Mr. Scott: 

Q. Go on, answer the question. Don't pay any 
attention to that Attorney-General. Answer the 
question. 

A. He said "I love her, and despise and hate 
him," but— 

Mr. Scott: Cross-examine. 

Cross-Examined. 
By Mr. Bell : 

Q. Well, now, young lady, you have not told all 
of this conversation, have you? 

A. No. 

Q. Now let me ask you if this was not the vital 
wind-up of the conversation : that Canon Crisparkle 
reasoned with your brother, and you reasoned with 
your brother, and finally he gave his word of honor 
as a Christian gentleman that he would meet Edwin 
Drood half way, and become reconciled, and let 
bygones be bygones. Isn't that so? 

A. He said he was willing to meet him half way. 

100 




Joseph P. Rogers 

as 

Mayor Sapsea 



DEFENSE— SAPSEA'S TESTIMONY 

Q. And didn't Canon Crisparkle say that Edwin 
Drood should meet him half way, or even more 
than half way? 

A. Yes ; I believe he did. 

Q. So that the wind-up of this interview on the 
river, that counsel has indicated you were so averse 
to tell, contained, in the finale, an agreement on his 
part as a Christian gentleman, giving his solemn 
pledge that he would meet Edwin Drood and become 
reconciled. Isn't that substantially so? 

A. It is. 

By Mr. Scott : 

Q. Just before he went into the gate-house, he 
still told you that he admired and loved Rosa Bud, 
didn't he? 

A. Yes; he did. 

The Court : Call another witness. 

Mr. Scott: I desire now, may it please your 
Honor, to call the Commonwealth's witness, Mayor 
Sapsea. 

Mr. Bell: Oh, pardon me — pardon me. Some 
people have greatness thrust upon them. The 
Mayor insisted, I mean Mr. Dogberry insisted, on 
being called as the Commonwealth's witness, and 
we gratified his vanity. 

The Court: The witness will take the stand. 
Proceed. 

(Mayor Sapsea takes the witness stand.) 
By Mr. Scott : 

Q. What is your full name? 
A. Thomas Sapsea. 
Q. What is your business? 

A. I am something of a literary man, but my 
business is that of an auctioneer. 
(Laughter.) 

101 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Q. And what is your official position, Mr. Sapsea, 
in Cloisterham? 

A. I have told you that I am doing the town of 
Cloisterham, and its people, the honor of being its 
Mayor. 

Q. Mayor, you can scarcely be ignorant of the 
fact that you know the world? 

A. Ignorant? No. I know something of the 
world, something of the world, young man. While 
I have not been to foreign countries, foreign coun- 
tries have come to me. I put my hand upon a clock, 
a French clock, and I at once say "Paris." I may 
see a cup and saucer of Chinese make. I then say 
"Pekin, Canton, or Nanking." So it is with Japan, 
with India. I have picked up a spear of Eskimo 
make, thereby putting my finger on the North Pole. 

(Laughter and applause.) 

Q. Mayor Sapsea, what was the testimony before 
you when Landless had his hearing, charged with 
the disappearance of Edwin Drood? 

A. The testimony before me was— sitting, as I 
was*, as the Magistrate at that time, your Lordship 
— that Landless had armed himself with an offensive 
weapon, that he had gone to the dinner, and that 
night he had arranged and destroyed some of his 
papers, and placed his possessions in a hidden sort 
of fashion; that when he was arrested there was 
blood upon his clothing. And I do not recall any- 
thing else of importance. 

Q. There was testimony that he had anteriorly 
threatened young Drood, was there not? 

A. Without doubt. 

MR. Bell : Is this an adverse witness ? 

The Court: The witness will proceed. This is 
an intelligent witness. 

By Mr. Scott: 

Q. That was all of the testimony before you, 
Mayor, wasn't it? 

102 



DEFENSE— SAPSEA'S TESTIMONY 

A. It was, indeed. 

Q. Knowing the world, and being a student of 
human nature, will you state whether you have 
since stated your suspicions of this young man, 
Landless? 

A. I have stated that there is more than suspicion 
— almost certainty, almost certainty. We have not 
got the proof, of course, but proof must be built 
up, stone by stone, and thus allowing the secrets of 
the prison house to escape, — "the secrets of the 
prison house," your Lordship, is a term that I use 
when I am upon the bench — I have not the slightest 
doubt but that the long arm of the law will reach out 
and get the murderer. With the iron will of my 
friend, Mr. Jasper, pursuing, the long arm and 
the strong arm of the law, will reach out and get 
him. "The long arm, and the strong arm," is what 
is called the investigation of the law. 

Q. You discharged young Landless from custody, 
after you heard all the testimony, including the 
testimony of the finding of the watch and chain, 
together with the pin, didn't you? 

A. I did my duty as an English Magistrate, and 
discharged him. 

Q. Why did you discharge him? 

A. I did not deem there was sufficient proof 
under the law. No one had seen the lost boy, and 
the proof not going beyond a moral certainty, I 
therefore discharged him. 

Q. Was there any proof before you that Drood 
had been killed? 

Mr. Bell: I object. It is not in the record. If 
there were, we would not be here to-night. 

Mr. Scott : The great trouble, may it please your 
Honor, is that he has been having some of his assist- 
ants in Harrisburg read the record. 

Mr. Bell : Qui facit per alium facit per se. 

103 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

MR. Scott: The record states "No discovery being 
made which proved the lost man to be dead, it at 
length became necessary to release the person sus- 
pected of having made away with him. Neville was 
set at large." 

The Court : The Court so recollects what is said 
in the book, and the witness can so testify. 

(Question read as follows: "Was there any proof 
before you that Drood had been killed?") 

Mr. Bell: I object to it. It is not in the record. 

The Court : Proceed with the answer. 

Mr. Bell : I object to such a question, that such a 
question is not in the record. 

Mr. Scott : Don't let the pealing of a "Bell" dis- 
turb you. 

The Court: Proceed. 

Mr. Bell: I insist upon a ruling, and that this 
witness shall not go "Scott" free in all of his an- 
swers. 

The Court: The objection is overruled, and the 
witness will proceed. 

By Mr. Scott: 

Q. Proceed with your answer, Mr. Sapsea, Mayor. 

A. There was no proof of the death of Edwin 
Drood before me. 

Q. You know John Jasper, don't you? 

A. I know him very well indeed. 

Q. How long have you known him? 

A. Oh, for a great many years. 

Q. Are you particularly well acquainted with Mr. 
Jasper? 

A. Very well acquainted with him. In fact Mr. 
Jasper is one of my admirers. I might add, among 
my other admirers, Mr. Jasper was one of the first, 
I believe, to recognize the merits of a slight literary 
effort on my part in behalf of the late Mrs. Sapsea. 

104 



DEFENSE— CROSS-EXAMINATION 

Q. What is Mr. Jasper's reputation for peace and 
quiet? 

A. It is unspotted and flawless — flawless indeed. 

Mr. Scott: You may cross-examine. I might say, 
Mr. Attorney-General, that at times even a Dogberry 
bites. 

Mr. Bell: I am always wary of Greeks bearing 
gifts. 

cross-examined. 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. May I ask if you, in your intimate acquaint- 
ance with Mr. Jasper, ever went on some jaunts, and 
opium debauches, down to London town ? 

A. Never beyond a few bottles of port wine, — in 
my own house, always. 

Q. So that this wide knowledge of the world that 
you had, so far as Jasper is concerned, is within the 
confines of your mayoralty? 

A. Within the confines of the ancient town of 
Cloisterham. 

Q. Are you related to Hoch Der Kaiser, or Theo- 
dore the First? 

(Laughter.) 

A. No ; but I strongly suspect that somewhere at 
the counsel table is a relative of Villa's.* 

Q. Are you intentionally guilty of an anachronism, 
or inadvertently so? 

A. As you choose to take it. 

Q. You speak of this literary talent you have, 
about the versatility of talent you possess. Will 
you kindly read to the jury this gem of literary 
merit that you refer to? 

A. Regarding the late Mrs. Sapsea? 

Q. Regarding the late Mrs. Sapsea. 

A. With pleasure. 



*Villa, at the date of the trial, was at the head of an insur- 
rection in Mexico, and there was rumor of war between him 
and the United States. 

105 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Q. I wish them to know what a literary pen you 
have. 

A. With pleasure. "Ethelinda, reverential wife 
of Mr. Thomas Sapsea, auctioneer, valuer, estate 
agent, etc., of this City, whose knowledge of the 
world though somewhat extensive, never brought 
him acquainted with a spirit more capable of look- 
ing up to him. Stranger, pause, and ask thyself the 
question, canst thou do likewise? If not, with a 
blush retire." 

Q. Is it not true that the prisoner here extolled 
the par excellence of this literary effort of yours? 

A. He admired it at once, upon his hearing my 
reading of it. 

Q. Did you lend to the rhyme of the poem the 
music of your voice also? 

A. I allowed it to have all that it was entitled to 
under the circumstancs. 

Q. Now just one question more. I want to know 
— I ask you if you recall, Mr. Mayor, what quadruped 
in the animal kingdom you and Dogberry typify? 

A. I answer that we are almost in the same stable. 

Q. Now I want to ask you, for it seems an affront 
to your dignity — treason, lese-majeste — 

The Court: Proceed. 

By Mr. Bell : 

Q. Why did you not expunge from the record this 
part of it. "Accepting the jackass as the type of 
self-sufficient stupidity and conceit — a custom per- 
haps, like some few other customs, more conven- 
tional than fair, then the purest jackass in Cloister- 
ham is Mr. Thomas Sapsea, auctioneer." Why did 
you not expunge that from the record? 

A. Well, Mr. Attorney-General, if that refers to 
me, it was written about me because you were not 
then living in Cloisterham. 

(Laughter and applause.) 
106 




The Trial Scene 



DEFENSE— JASPER'S TESTIMONY 

(John Jasper takes the witness stand.) 

By Mr. Scott: 

Q. You are the defendant, aren't you? 

A. I am. 

Mr. Scott: Keep your voice up, so the jury can 
hear you, Mr. Jasper. 

By Mr. Scott: 

Q. What is your name? 

A. John Jasper. 

Q. Where do you live? 

A. Cloisterham. I have rooms with the verger, 
Mr. Tope. 

Q. What is your profession? 

A. I am the choir master and organist of Cloister- 
ham Cathedral. 

Q. And your age is what? 

A. 27 years. 

Q. How long have you lived at Cloisterham? 

A. About ten years. 

Q. What was your relationship to Edwin Drood? 

A. I was his uncle. 

Q. Mr. Jasper, you are charged with the murder 
of your nephew. Did you murder him? 

A. I did not. 

Q. When did you last see your nephew, Edwin 
Drood? 

A. I last saw my nephew, Edwin Drood, on 
Christmas Eve., about 12 o'clock. 

Q. Keep your voice up, Mr. Jasper, so that the 
gentlemen at the end of the jury can hear you. 

The Court: The Court will ask the witness to 
speak in a distinct tone of voice, so that he may be 
heard. 

By Mr. Scott: 

Q. What hour of the night, on this Christmas 
Eve, did you last see your nephew? 

A. Twelve o'clock. 

107 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Q. Will you tell the jury in your own way of the 
occasion of your seeing Edwin Drood on this Christ- 
mas Eve? 

A. I had arranged a party of reconciliation be- 
tween my nephew, Edwin Drood, and Neville Land- 
less. Sometime prior to that the boys had had a 
misunderstanding, and I arranged this little dinner 
to bring them together. They met there that night, 
and about twelve o'clock they left my rooms to go 
to view the effect of the storm on the river, a storm 
having arisen about eleven o'clock. That is the last 
I saw of him. 

Q. What did you next do? 

A. The next morning I rushed over to Canon 
Crisparkle's home, and on my way there I observed 
a crowd standing around the Cathedral tower. The 
hands of the clock had been torn off. The lead of 
the roof had been rolled up and thrown to the 
ground, and some of the stones had been broken off. 
I saw Canon Crisparkle standing at his window, and 
I rushed up and I said "Where is my nephew?" He 
said "He is not here. He is not with me." I said 
"He is not? He left about midnight last night with 
Neville Landless, and has not returned." He said 
"Neville left early this morning." I said "Let me 
in; let me in." 

Q. What was done with reference to Neville 
Landless ? 

A. A posse was organized, of which I was one, 
and we followed the route taken by Neville Landless. 

Q. And he was apprehended and brought on be- 
fore Mayor Sapsea as the Mayor, as related here in 
the court room. Isn't that so? 

A. He was. 

Q. After Landless was paroled in the custody of 
his teacher, what did you then do? 

A. I spent two days and two nights searching the 
river banks, but I could find no tidings of my boy. 

108 



DEFENSE— JASPER'S TESTIMONY 

Q. You remember the evening of December 27th, 
1851? 

A. I do. 

Q. Whom did you meet that evening? 

A. I had returned to my home, exhausted from 
my search, without food, without rest, and Mr. 
Grewgious called to see me. 

Q. What did Mr. Grewgious say to you? What 
did you say to him? 

A. Mr. Grewgious entered my apartments, and 
he said to me "This is strange news." I said "It is" 
— referring to the disappearance. He said "I have 
news for you that will surprise you." He said "Will 
you hear it now?" I said "Tell it to me." He told 
me then that he had called to tell me that Edwin 
Drood and Rosa Bud had broken off their engage- 
ment. 

Q. What then happened, as far as you remember? 

A. As I had built up my hopes in connection with 
my nephew and Rosa Bud, in my weakened condi- 
tion I fell to the floor in a swoon. 

Q. When you regained consciousness from that 
swoon, what did you then say? 

A. I told him that I had some crumbs of comfort 
from the story which he told me. I told him that 
I thought probably the disappearance of Edwin 
Drood was explained by the fact that he probably 
did not care to remain in Cloisterham to answer the 
questioning tongues of the townspeople concerning 
the broken engagement. 

Q. While you were relating that, who else came 
into your room? 

A. Canon Crisparkle. 

Q. What did Canon Crisparkle say in reference to 
your view? 

A. I had expressed the same theory in his pres- 
ence, and he said "I trust that may be true." 

109 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Q. What did you then do? 

A. Following that, I spent all my time in en- 
deavoring to weave around the one man I supposed 
to be guilty of the murder of my nephew — to weave 
around him the net, and I followed him to London. 
I followed Neville Landless to London and spied 
upon him, and watched him, although I never saw 
him come out of his quarters until night, only at 
night. 

Q. Mr. Jasper, you stated that this Christmas 
Eve dinner with Edwin and Neville was for the 
purpose of establishing a friendly relation between 
the two young men. Had there been a quarrel be- 
tween them? 

A. There had. 

Q. When? 

A. Sometime prior to that, the day that Neville 
Landless and his sister arrived in Cloisterham, a 
party was given, or rather a dinner was given by 
that good man, Canon Crisparkle, at his home. 
They were there. Neville Landless, and his sister, 
Rosa Bud, and Edwin and myself. And in the even- 
ing the boys went home with Helena — 

Q. Don't talk so fast, and keep your voice up so 
that the jury can hear the whole of your story. 
Throw your voice out so that those at the end of 
the court room may hear. 

Mr. Bell: Remember, he is undergoing a strain. 

By Mr. Scott : 

Q. Proceed. 

A. The two boys saw Rosa Bud and Helena home 
from the house. Meantime I had been out for a 
stroll. As I came home I heard words. I stepped 
across the street and heard Neville Landless say, 
"In the part of the world I come from, you would 
be called to account for this." I stepped in between 
the boys, and I insisted upon them becoming good 
friends, and invited them to my quarters. While 

110 



DEFENSE-JASPER'S TESTIMONY 

they were there I brewed, or rather I mulled, a 
glass of wine for them, and during the course of 
the evening they fell to discussing things. Recrimi- 
nation followed recrimination, until as a result of 
their quarrel Neville Landless drew back with his 
glass, and dashed the contents of his glass in the 
face of Edwin Drood, and if it had not been that I 
was there at that time to protect him, he would have 
thrown the glass after it. He struggled to break 
away from me, and dashed the glass on the hearth- 
stone, and rushed from my quarters. 

Q. This mulled wine that you gave to Edwin and 
to Neville, did you mull it at your open fireplace 
before the two young men? 

A. I did. 

Q. Did you fill the glass of both young men and 
also your own glass, from the common vessel? 
A. I did; in their presence. 

Q. What did you do with the wine that you filled 
in your own glass? 
A. I drank it. 

Q. In their presence? 
A. In their presence. 

Q. When Neville Landless came to your home to 
have this meal on Christmas Eve, did you notice 
whether or not he carried a heavy walking stick of 
iron wood? 

A. I noticed that he had such a stick with him. 

Q. When you saw him apprehended the next day, 
eight miles from Cloisterham, was he still armed 
with that stick? 

A. He was, and I called the attention of those 
who were around that there were blood spots upon 
the stick, and there were blood spots upon his 
clothes. 

Ill 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

cross-examined. 
By Mr. Bell: 

Q. Now don't you know that those blood spots 
upon his clothes were duplicated by blood spots 
upon the clothes of one of the fellow townsmen with 
whom he had an encounter when he resisted arrest? 

A. So he said. 

Q. And didn't the crowd accept that verdict? 

A. They believed what he said. 

Q. And he pointed to his opponent, who had the 
identical blood upon his person? 

A. He had blood on his person. 

Q. In your presence? 

A. Yes. 

Q. Why do you seek to create an impression to 
the contrary? 

A. I at that time did not know. 

Q. I mean here before this jury? 

A. I told you what I saw at that time. 

Q. All right. Now you have explained it. 

The Court: The witness can explain in his own 
language. 

Mr. Bell : I will give him time to explain. 

The Witness : What do you wish me to explain ? 

Mr. Bell : You have given the explanation. That 
is enough, sir. 

By Mr. Bell : 

Q. Your vocation is that of an organist and choir 
master, and lay precentor in this cathedral? 

A. Yes. 

Q. But ever and anon, between sacred services, 
you go down to see Princess Puffer, and go on an 
opium debauch? 

A. I have gone down there to indulge in my habit 
of smoking opium. That I admit. 

Q. And the good townspeople in Cloisterham, 
from the stupid Mayor down, did not know any- 
thing about it, did they? 

112 







John P. Colghlix 

as 

John Jasper 



DEFENSE— CROSS-EXAMINATION 

A. No, and I was very anxious that they should 
not. 

Q. You made the acquaintance of one Durdles up 
at Cloisterham? 

A. I did. 

Q. I suppose he was one of your intellectual 
equals, wasn't he? 

A. He was not. 

Q. And yet you were very chivalric with him, 
weren't you? 

A. I was. 

Q. You wanted to carry his bundle home for him ? 

A. I had conceived the desire or intention of writ- 
ing a book, if I were capable of so doing, concerning 
Cloisterham and its people, and I wanted to get local 
atmosphere, and I selected my friend Durdles as 
being a character, and therefore I effected his ac- 
quaintance. 

Q. So in order to get local atmosphere you car- 
ried his bundle home that contained the key to the 
Sapsea vault, hey? 

A. To when do you refer? What time? 

Q. You know the night to which I refer? 

A. From Sapsea's? 

Q. No. When he was standing up against the 
iron rails of the cemetery. That is the night. 

A. That was after the Sapsea visit? 

Q. Yes, the same night. You had tried to get the 
bundle at Sapsea's? 

A. I weighed the keys in my hand. 

Q. Were you trying to get local atmosphere up 
there, too? 

A. I was ; and I got it, too. 

Q. What was it— a drink? 

A. No. Conceit, from my friend, Mayor Sapsea, 
and reality, from Durdles. 

Q. Were you trying to get local atmosphere when 
you and Durdles stood behind the wall, seeing Canon 

113 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Crisparkle and Neville Landless going by, and 
stooped down so that they would not see you? Was 
that local atmosphere? 

A. It was. I got the local atmosphere of a good 
kindly man in the futile attempt of taming a tiger- 
ish disposition. It was so futile that it was ludi- 
crous to me, and I laughed. 

Q. Why did you hide behind the wall when they 
went by? In order to get the local atmosphere? 

A. Because I wanted to be alone with Durdles, 
and hear his own story. 

Q. You did not want them to know that you were 
going to take this midnight expedition down in the 
crypt, did you? 

A. They had heard of it. 

Q. You did not want them to know you were 
going down that night in the crypt? 

A. They had heard of it. 

Q. You went down clandestinely? 

A. Not necessarily. It was mentioned before 
Sapsea, the Dean, and Tope. 

Q. Then why did you hide behind this wall? 

A. As I explained, as I said, we did not want any 
interruptions. We wanted to go down there alone, 
without being detained. 

Q. Then you did not want them to know you were 
going down that night? 

A. I did not want to be detained. 

Q. You went down at midnight? 

A. We did. 

Q. Why did you take along this wicker bottle filled 
with liquor? 

A. The nearest road to Durdles' affections was by 
the liquor route. 

Q. So you bought this liquor to give to Durdles— 
you, a member of the Church? 

114 



DEFENSE— CROSS-EXAMINATION 

A. You have heard what Durdles has said about 
bringing enough for twice two, and being twice wel- 
come. 

Q. You, a Churchman, provided yourself with a 
bottle of liquor, and you went down on this mid- 
night expedition into the crypt with Durdles? 

A. I did. 

Q. Of course he passed away? 

A. He became intoxicated, it is true. 

Q. Was it your idea of getting local atmosphere 
to spend two hours down in the crypt, alone, while 
Durdles, from whom you expected to get it, lay in a 
drunken stupor, the result of your having given him 
liquor? 

A. He was kind enough to bring me there, and I 
would not go away without him. 

Q. So you gave him the liquor, and he gave you 
the bundle with the key in it? 

A. What key? 

Q. I asked you, the key? 

A. There were two keys. Which key? 

Q. Were there two keys in the bundle? 

A. I don't recall seeing them. 

Q. You were intensely interested in a key in the 
bundle? 

A. There were two keys. To which key do you 
refer? 

Q. I refer to the key in the bundle, the key in the 
bundle at Mayor Sapsea's; the key in the bundle 
when you chivalrously escorted him home? 

A. What key was it, and I will tell you? There 
were two keys that night. 

Q. What did you get in the bundle that you 
wanted to get? 

A. I didn't see a key in the bundle. 

The Court: The witness has a right to answer 
in his own way. 

115 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

The Witness: If he will tell me which key he 
is referring to ; I don't think he knows. 

Mr. Bell: It is immaterial. 

By Mr. Bell: 

Q. There was a key in the bundle, wasn't there? 

A. I didn't see a key in the bundle. 

Q. Didn't you see him put a key in the bundle up 
at Mayor Sapsea's? 

A. That was several days before. That was the 
key of the Sapsea monument. 

Q. Yes. 

A. The keys that he used — I will tell you for your 
information, that which he used that night was the 
key which admitted us to the crypt; and the other 
key — after we ascended the stone steps through the 
crypt up to the chancel hall, there was a door lead- 
ing up into the tower. He had two keys, and if you 
will tell me which key you are referring to, I will 
try to explain it to you. 

Q. You just took the whole three keys, and 
sounded them in a musical way? 

A. There were but two that night. 

Q. Up at Sapsea's weren't there three? 

A. There were. Being a musician I was anxious 
to strike the chord. 

Q. I think we have got enough local atmosphere 
in a midnight expedition. Tell me why — when you 
came out — when you came out why did you grab 
the boy by the throat in a demoniacal rage, and 
threaten to strangle him because he happened to be 
on the watch? 

A. That was not the first time I had met that 
boy. 

Q. You did threaten to strangle him then? 

A. I did attempt to strangle him that night. 

Q. You were in love with Rosa Bud, weren't you? 

A. I was. 

116 



DEFENSE— CROSS-EXAMINATION 

Q. Madly in love with her? 

A. Passionately. 

Q. Do you remember that interview you had with 
her in the nun's garden? 

A. I recall it very distinctly; yes. 

Q. Didn't you say to her there, referring to 
Neville Landless, that he was in direct peril, and, 
"Judge for yourself," you said to her, "whether 
another admirer can love you and live?" 

A. Referring to him. I meant that, and I meant 
it thoroughly, as I regarded him as the murderer of 
my dead nephew. 

Mr. Scott: That question is objected to. 

By Mr. Bell : 

Q. Didn't you refer to Edwin Drood 

Mr. Scott: That is objected to. 

By Mr. Bell: 

Q. Didn't you say, sir, having reference to Edwin 
Drood, whom you are charged with murdering here, 
that had the ties which bound you to him been one 
silken thread less than what they were, you would 
have swept even him out of existence, because of 
your mad love for her? 

A. I did say that, and I also said that while I 
thought she was his, and while I thought that he 
had her love, that I proved loyal to him and to her, 
and I never would utter one word of love to her 
until after the engagement had been broken six 
months. 

Q. But she told you at that interview that you 
told her that you loved her madly, all the time he was 
alive. Didn't you? 

A. I did. 

Q. And she knew it as a result of your hypnotic 
glances. Didn't she tell you so? 

A. I have no hypnotic influence over her, or over 
any other person. 

117 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Q. Well, you kept a diary, didn't you? 

A. It is in evidence. 

Q. You make entries in that diary, don't you? 

A. They are in evidence. 

Q. And didn't you, after the watch and pin were 
found in the river — by the way, you suggested to 
Mayor Sapsea that the river be searched? 

A. He was the one to attend to that. 

Q. But you said you understood him to say so, 
when you, in fact, said so? 

A. The suggestion came from me. It was a 
proper thing to do under the circumstances. 

Q. Why did you put it into his mouth? 

A. Because he probably overlooked his duty at 
that time. 

Q. After the watch and pin were found, you wrote 
in your diary, "My dear boy is murdered," didn't 
you? 

A. I did. 

Q. And you wrote that you threw to the winds— 
you scouted all suggestion that he had disappeared? 

A. Yes; I did. 

Q. That any thought of that kind perished before 
the fatal discovery of the watch and pin up there 
in the weir by the river — didn't you? 

A. I did. 

Q. And you went into mourning for your nephew? 

A. I did. 

Q. And you, from that time on, have invariably 
referred to him as murdered, haven't you? 

A. I have. 

Q. Now you want this jury to think that he is not, 
do you? 

A. No. 

The Court: Are there any more witnesses? 
MR. Scott: That is the defence, your Honor. 

118 




Two of the Veniremen 
Wm, T. Tilden A. G. Hetherington 



DEFENSE— CLOSING SPEECH OF COUNSEL 

The Court: Gentlemen of the jury: counsel for 
the prosecution have very magnanimously agreed to 
shorten the program. The Attorney-General, who 
had prepared to sum up in a masterly way to the 
jury, has agreed to waive his right to do so. 

The attorney, however, for the defence, has not 
yet appeared in the trial. It is agreed that he shall 
have ten minutes talk to the jury, after which there 
will be a recess of five minutes, and then the Court 
will charge the jury. 

Counsel for the defence will now proceed to the 
jury. 

Mr. Scott : May it please your Honor. 

Gentlemen of the jury: This defendant is pre- 
sumed to be innocent. Before you may find him guilty 
you must have evidence not only sufficient to over- 
come this presumption of innocence, but to convince 
you of the defendant's guilt beyond every reasonable 
doubt. The burden of presenting such evidence is 
upon the Commonwealth. 

The Commonwealth must prove — 

First: that Edwin Drood was murdered. 

Second : that he was murdered by John Jasper. 

Has this been accomplished by the Common- 
wealth's testimony? 

What is the evidence of John Jasper's guilt? No 
mortal claims to have seen the defendant murder 
his nephew. 

Its highest offer is a tissue of straggling, uncon- 
vincing circumstances which it claims point to his 
guilt. 

It is claimed that his love for Rosa Bud is the mo- 
tive ; it is claimed that the knowledge of and visit to 
the crypt and tower were preparations for the crime ; 
it is claimed that the drunken mutterings of this de- 
fendant at Princess Puffer's den were admissions of 
guilt; but how flimsy is such evidence. And how 
quickly it disappears upon the slightest scrutiny! 

119 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

The love of Jasper for Rosa Bud was concealed in his 
heart as sacredly and secretly as the love of Grew- 
gious for the drowned mother of his ward. And this 
secret love of Jasper for Rosa Bud was accompanied 
by his open, expressed love and affection for his 
nephew, the betrothed of Rosa Bud. Nor was this 
love for Rosa Bud voiced until six months after the 
broken engagement and the disappearance of Edwin. 

Can this affection for the girl who was soon to 
marry his nephew be called motive actuating the 
destruction of his own nephew? If the defendant's 
love for Rosa Bud, concealed and sacred as it was, 
is a motive for this crime, how do you dispose of 
the defendant's great love, affection and tenderness 
for the nephew of whose murder he is charged? 
How do you dispose of the testimony of honest Mrs. 
Tope, who tells you her sincere story of this affec- 
tion? 

What evidence of the defendant's guilt is given 
to you by the poor, drunken Durdles in his besotted 
story? He met Jasper at the home of Mayor Sapsea 
and there obtained the keys to the Sapsea tomb ; he 
tells you that these keys were weighed by Jasper, 
but at the suggestion of Durdles, himself ; that later 
in the evening Jasper proffered his kind offices to 
accompany the poor drunkard to his home and to 
carry his bundle, which Durdles was almost in- 
capable of carrying. Is the accusation of the guilt 
of this defendant strengthened at all by this portion 
of Durdles' story? And, again, when Durdles tells 
you that on Monday night before Christmas Eve, as 
previously arranged, Jasper came to his hovel for the 
purpose of visiting the crypt and tower of the 
Cathedral, does he give you any evidence against 
this defendant? 

The prosecuting attorney makes much of the fact 
that on this visit Jasper carries with him a wicker 
bottle of liquor for Durdles ; but he forgets Durdles' 

120 



DEFENSE— CLOSING SPEECH OF COUNSEL 

story "that anyone was welcome to call at his home 
who brought liquor for two, or if he likes to make 
it twice two, he will be twice as welcome." And he 
makes much of the fact that Durdles and Jasper left 
the crypt, going to the top of the tower and while 
on the trip Durdles carries the rum, and Jasper — 
Durdles' ever present dinner bundle. But he forgets 
that there was no evidence that the bundle on that 
night contained the key to Sapsea's or any other 
tomb. 

Does the testimony of Durdles, that he and Jasper 
concealed themselves by the wall when Crisparkel 
and Neville Landless passed, and that Jasper laughed 
at the poor, innocent Crisparkel and the savage 
young tiger from Ceylon whom he sought to tame, 
point to this defendant's guilt? He ignores the fact 
that Jasper ever sought retirement from compan- 
ions, that he was a man who led a solitary, melan- 
choly life. The prosecuting attorney points to Dur- 
dles' characterization of Jasper's angry expression 
towards Landless, as an indication of this defend- 
ant's guilt ; but he forgets the cause of that enmity 
— that but a short time before this same young man 
had attempted to cut down the beloved nephew of 
Jasper. What would the Commonwealth ask you 
men to draw from Durdles' testimony? Surely there 
is no significance in Jasper's desire to go to the top 
of the tower, or in paying his guide, Durdles, with 
the price that appealed to him most, a bottle of 
liquor. Surely no guilt can be inferred from Dur- 
dles' drunken dream in the crypt, because he tells 
you, himself, that the Christmas Eve before in that 
same crypt his drunken dream was "a ghost of a 
shriek and the ghost of a howl of a dog." 

The Commonwealth then resorts to its pitiful 
attempt to prove the defendant's guilt by the worth- 
less testimony of an opium hag — a poor, drunken 
sot who tells you that for sixteen years she was a 

121 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

drunkard making her living by selling opium to 
"Chinamen, Lascars and Knifers." Who resorts to 
begging and has shown her willingness to add black- 
mail to her nefarious callings. They would attempt 
by her testimony to raise the mutterings of this 
benumbed defendant while under the influence of 
opium so willingly supplied by her hands, to admis- 
sion of guilt. But with all this, what does this poor 
creature tell you? Nothing more than that the de- 
fendant smoking opium in her den referred to a 
journey that he had often taken in his fancy, and 
then she depicts his actions and tells of his inco- 
herent mumblings while completely under the in- 
fluence of the drug. 

The Commonwealth would ask that you give to 
the story of this wicked, worthless hag, this drunk- 
ard, this opium smoker, this associate of Chinamen 
and cut-throats, the credence of verity. What vio- 
lence to the common-sense of intelligent men, is this? 

Nor can the testimony of Grewgious persuade 
your mind of the guilt of this defendant ; rather does 
it establish more convincingly his innocence; more 
does it remove the Commonwealth's argument of 
motive. Grewgious pictures to you the scene of the 
defendant's collapse on the evening two days after 
Edwin's disappearance. The Commonwealth con- 
tends that the collapse of the defendant following 
the sudden information by Grewgious of the broken 
engagement of Edwin and Rosa Bud, points to his 
guilt. Does it not rather eloquently picture Jasper's 
great love for Edwin ; does not his collapse after his 
days of exhausting search better portray the blasted 
hope for his beloved nephew's happiness? 

This is the Commonwealth's whole story against 
John Jasper. Is there any portion of it that points 
to the guilt of the defendant? 

But we have another towards whom the finger of 
suspicion points — Neville Landless, whose own lips 

122 



DEFENSE— CLOSING SPEECH OF COUNSEL 

said "I love Rosa Bud and I hate and despise Edwin 
Drood." 

If there was motive on Jasper's part of secret 
love for Rosa Bud what more was the motive for 
this wild young tiger from Ceylon who had lived a 
life unrestrained, inflamed with infatuation for 
Rosa Bud, impulsed by his hatred for Drood — a 
hatred bred of insult by Drood, and his champion- 
ship of the lady herself. Who is this Neville Land- 
less? By his own words, "Of such tigerish blood 
that he would have struck Drood down on the day 
of their first meeting had this defendant not re- 
strained him." From his own tongue, "One who 
would have murdered his stepfather had not natural 
death prevented." But we find even more — not only 
his murderous disposition, but also we find him the 
last person in whose presence is seen Edwin Drood. 
Who but Landless testifies to the return of Drood 
from the trip to the river? 

But more: the next day after the disappearance 
of Drood the citizens of Cloisterham pursued Land- 
less and he is not overpowered until he is stricken 
down and has struck down with his heavy iron wood 
stick at least one of his captors. Surely, here lies 
suspicion: motive, openly expressed; opportunity 
clearly shown. And more — we find that it is towards 
Neville Landless that the finger of suspicion is 
pointed and the good people of Cloisterham shun 
and condemn him. The good Dean of the Cathedral 
directs Crisparkel to dismiss him from his home. 

How can you, jurymen, say by your verdict that 
the finger of guilt points towards John Jasper more 
than toward Neville Landless? 

Upon the part of this defendant the testimony 
shows Jasper's love for Edwin Drood; of Neville 
Landless it shows his hate for Edwin Drood. 

On the part of John Jasper the testimony shows 
his love for Rosa Bud sacredly concealed in his 

123 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

breast; not disclosed until six months after the 
breaking of the engagement and the disappearance 
of Edwin Drood. Of Neville Landless it shows his 
love for Rosa Bud, monstrous, openly declared to 
Crisparkel and to Helena, his sister, in the words, 
"Husband or no husband, that fellow is unworthy 
of her. I love Rosa Bud and I hate and despise 
him." 

On the part of the defendant, John Jasper, there 
is shown no opportunity to have murdered Edwin 
Drood on Christmas Eve. Of Neville Landless the 
testimony shows that it was in his company Edwin 
Drood was last seen ; that Landless was armed with 
a stick that might well have laid Edwin low. 

Of Jasper, we find from the testimony that he 
was of a quiet, melancholy, retiring disposition, 
given to the habit of opium smoking. Of Neville 
Landless the testimony tells us he is of tigerish 
blood, of unrestrained temper, of violent, murderous, 
disposition. 

Does the Commonwealth claim that the guilt of 
John Jasper has been proved by the finding of the 
watch and chain and pin? Surely there can be no 
such contention because we find from the evidence 
that twenty minutes after two o'clock on the 24th 
day of December this watch was wound by the local 
jeweler. When the watch was found on the 28th 
day of December in the timber of the weir by 
Crisparkel the watch had run down and had not 
been wound. Does this give to the Commonwealth 
the right to contend that Jasper placed this watch 
and pin where found? 

Gentlemen of the Jury, is it not a significant fact 
that we find Neville Landless roaming along the 
banks of the river in the neighborhood of the weir 
after his parole by Mayor Sapsea and before the 
discovery of the jewelry by Crisparkel? Is there 
any more evidence against Jasper as to the placing 

124 



DEFENSE— CLOSING SPEECH OF COUNSEL 

of them, than against Landless? Was there any- 
more opportunity to Jasper than to Landless? 

Has the Commonwealth even proved that there 
was a murder of Edwin Drood? Where is the 
proof? Where was he murdered and how? Does 
the Commonwealth charge he was decoyed to and 
thrown from the top of the tower? Does the dis- 
placement of the stone and the lead of the tower 
top and the removal of the hands of the tower clock 
explain Drood's fall from its height? If so, where 
is the evidence at the bottom of the tower? Where 
are the blood stains? Do they not forget the fearful 
storm of the night hours "that tore through the 
streets of Cloisterham. No such power of wind had 
blown for many a winter night; chimneys toppled 
to the street and large branches torn from the trees 
crashed to the earth." Do they forget this or de- 
liberately ignore it? 

Or does the Commonwealth claim that Jasper gar- 
rotted Drood with the scarf with which the singer 
protected his throat from the dampness of the 
Cathedral and that the body was concealed in the 
Sapsea tomb, buried in the quicklime from Durdles' 
yard. If this is the Commonwealth's contention, 
where is the proof of this unholy use of his protect- 
ing scarf? Where is the proof that the lime which 
was seen unprotected a week before, retained its de- 
structive properties until this Christmas Eve? For 
the Commonwealth to establish the retention of this 
strength it would have to controvert the very laws 
of nature. If this is their contention why the ab- 
sence of Durdles' testimony to prove the disappear- 
ance of the quicklime? Why the absence of the tes- 
timony to prove the disturbance of the tomb? If 
there is evidence of this fact, the Commonwealth 
must have it at its hands ; the key to Sapsea's monu- 
ment is in the possession of their witness, Durdles. 

Does the Commonwealth contend that the body 

125 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

was disposed of in the river? The search of many 
days has failed to aid this contention. 

The failure of the Commonwealth to prove 
Drood's murder seemed so apparent that even the 
committing- Magistrate, Mayor Sapsea, said, in 
dismissing the inquiry of Drood's disappearance, 
"Nothing more being found and no discovery being 
made which proved the lost man to be dead, it was 
necessary to dismiss the person suspected." 

We, therefore, respectfully submit to the jury 
that the Commonwealth has failed to prove the two 
essential elements in this case: 

First— That Edwin Drood was murdered. 

Second — That he was murdered by John Jasper, 
and the defendant should therefore be found "NOT 
GUILTY." 



Mr. Bell: * Gentlemen of the jury: I daresay I 
may give proper expression to your feelings in the 
oft-repeated saying of that royal murderer — 

"If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well 
it were done quickly." 

When Billy Sunday, the evangelist, addressed the 
University students the other day (pardon the 
anachronism) his text was: "Be strong and prove 
yourself a man." Even so, do not let any molly- 
coddle misgivings or doctrinaire doubts sweep you 
from your mental moorings in this case. 

I submit I have proved everything I have prom- 
ised in my opening address. First, then, let us con- 
sider the hypocritical, infamous, murderous char- 
acter of this defendant, that you may conclude he 
would not hesitate to commit the crime of murder 



*Due to the lateness of the hour, Mr. Bell graciously 
agreed to omit his closing speech. Owing to the excellence 
of the address, the Editor deems it fitting to publish the same. 

126 



SUMMING UP OF PROSECUTION 

with which he is charged. It has been vainly sought 
to prove his good character in aid of the defense of 
reasonable doubt. But what does the good Canon 
Crisparkel, or that monument of stupidity and con- 
ceit — Mayor Sapsea, or the simple Mrs. Tope or 
any of the other sweet souls who are cloistered in 
Cloisterham, know about the other side of the lan- 
tern—about the doings in the opium joints of East 
London? There is a difference between reputation 
and character. It may be conceded that the pris- 
oner's reputation within the narrow precincts of 
Cloisterham was good; but the fact is conclusively 
established that his character was hypocritical, in- 
famous and murderous. An organist, leader of the 
choir in the old Cathedral, his vocation was to direct 
the thoughts, the hopes, the hearts, the prayers of 
sinners to high Heaven. But, arch-hypocrite that 
he was, between the sacred services, he betook him- 
self incog, to Princess Puffer's den of iniquity, fre- 
quented by low characters, where he indulged in 
opiate debauches and gave vent to murderous mut- 
terings and threats against his nephew. Demon- 
stratively professing for that nephew the tenderest 
affection, he nevertheless made fiendish love to his 
fiancee, enslaving her with his Svengali-like looks, 
and forbidding her to disclose his hellish affection 
to Edwin. That this love was mad and murderous 
is established by her unimpeached testimony, for 
you will recall what she told you of that scene in 
the garden — how, in a mephistophelian monotone, 
with imperturbable countenance, he avowed over 
and over again that he loved her madly, and that 
no other admirer could love her and live ; aye, more, 
that had the ties which bound him to his dear boy 
been one silken thread less, he would have swept 
"even him" out of human existence because of his 
mad love for her. Gentlemen, it is clear beyond a 
doubt that John Jasper's heart was as black as 

127 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

pitch — his instincts bestial, fiendish, and that he 
was a character of Hell. Away, then, with all sug- 
gestion that this man's character should weigh in 
the balance of reasonable doubt. 

What I have said to you indicates the motive that 
actuated the crime — mad, murderous love for Rosa 
— fiendish jealousy of his innocent, unsuspecting 
and loving nephew. Love, at once the inspiration 
and the desperation of the world, what crimes are 
committed in thy name! It has been so in all ages 
and among all peoples. Achilles liked to have sacri- 
ficed Greece and her glory for a female captive. 

Mark Antony nearly lost a world for the dark- 
eyed sorceress of the Nile. Mirabeau almost bar- 
tered his love of country for the love of a Queen. 
Charles the Second's dying words were : "Don't let 
poor Nellie starve." So, too, his name enshrined 
in the motto — "England expects every man to do 
his duty," even Lord Nelson petitioned the Nation 
to pension his "Lady Hamilton." Crimes against 
self and family and country are these! Witness 
further the reign of Henry VIII, with its murderous 
crimes against the Church and Heaven. 

A patriotic modesty moves me to refrain from 
mentioning Alexander Hamilton's amours, or Old 
Hickory's infatuation for the bar maid. Love, then, 
gentlemen — murderous love — such was the motive 
of John Jasper. 

And now, bearing in mind his hellish character 
and his murderous motive, let us pass to the incrimi- 
nating circumstantial evidence which convicts him, 
to a moral certainty, of this crime. And here, let 
me again remind you that our present great Chief 
Justice Gibson has declared that such circumstantial 
evidence in the concrete may be infinitely stronger 
than positive testimony. And so it is in this case. 

Let us then examine this evidence in the concrete, 
item by item, and ask yourself, in each instance, 

128 



SUMMING UP OF PROSECUTION 

this pointed inquiry: Is this item of evidence con- 
sistent with innocence? Is it explicable upon the 
theory of innocence? If it is not, and leads, step 
by step, to the conclusion of guilt, then, gentlemen, 
your duty lies plainly before you. I ask you, then, 
is it consistent with innocence that John Jasper 
should endeavor mal-adroitly, to get from Durdles 
the keys to the crypts and the Sapsea vault; that 
this churchman should have induced Durdles to take 
him clandestinely into the crypt at midnight, and 
then have stupefied Durdles with drink, enabling 
Jasper to spend several hours there in undisturbed 
exploration ; that upon emerging and finding Deputy 
on the watch, he should, in demoniacal rage, almost 
have strangled the boy? That under the pretense 
of acting as a peacemaker, he should have given 
drugged wine to Edwin and Neville and fanned the 
flame of their quarrel into a white heat, and then 
declared that young Landless' conduct was mur- 
derous. 

Is it consistent with innocence that Jasper should 
have waited from twelve o'clock midnight until the 
next morning, and then have burst, pale, half -naked 
and panting, upon the crowd, demanding to know 
where his nephew was; that he should have made 
no inquiry during the raging storm between mid- 
night and morning if he were so exercised by his 
dear boy's absence; that he should have falsely put 
the words suggesting the searching of the river and 
its banks, into the mouth of Mayor Sapsea? Who 
threw the watch and pin, found by Mr. Crisparkel, 
into the river? Why did John Jasper make this 
suggestion, and why did he make it in this disin- 
genuous and insidious way? 

And now let us turn to the incident of December 
23rd under the Cathedral elms, as Edwin and Rosa 
bade each other an affectionate farewell. Why was 
John Jasper there, peering, spying at them under 

129 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

the trees as they kissed each other good-bye? And 
why did he covertly follow them to the gatehouse? 
Why was Rosa Bud so perturbed? And here, let 
us pause for a moment, that you may consider Rosa 
Bud's condemnation of John Jasper. Why did she 
accuse him, in the garden scene, of being a bad, 
bad man, disloyal and false to Eddy? Why did she 
suspect Jasper of this crime before anyone else? 
Ah, it was her instinct! There is nothing like a 
woman's instinct ! She may know little of the rules 
of logic ; she may lack, as Kipling says, the qualities 
that make for abstract justice; but no one will deny 
that her instinct is "deadlier than the male." She 
jumps right to the conclusion, and her conclusion 
is right, too. Don't forget, in your deliberation 
upon this case, that the unerring, deadly instinct of 
this woman adjudged the guilt of John Jasper long 
before the slow process of the law had woven its 
web about him. 

Gentlemen, it was that kiss under the trees that 
fanned the flame of fiendish jealousy in the black 
heart of this defendant to a white heat. To him 
it meant the confirmation of their promise of mar- 
riage to be solemnized in May. And mark you what 
Jasper did. Off he went that night to the opium 
den of Princess Puffer. What murderous mutter- 
ings and threats against Edwin Drood he gave vent 
to while there, you have had from the lips of Prin- 
cess Puffer who followed him to Cloisterham the 
next afternoon, December 24th, and there met 
Edwin. And here let me pause again, in the recital 
of these events, to adjure you not to let the motive 
of this witness be attacked. Low women are not 
devoid of hearts. The instincts of humanity and 
natural justice often well up within them more 
strongly than in the hearts of their gentler sisters. 
It was the instinct of humanity and natural justice, 
the desire to warn and prevent the foul murder of 

130 



SUMMING UP OF PROSECUTION 

an innocent boy, that moved this woman to follow 
this villian to Cloisterham. 

Ah, but Counsel will argue that these warnings 
uttered by Princess Puffer, even if made by John 
Jasper, were mental hallucinations — the vaporings 
or fancies of a drug-beclouded mind. Not so, not 
so! "In vino Veritas" is a maxim that has been 
coined out of the wisdom and experience of ages— 
when the wine or drug is in, the truth is out. 

But, mark you further, that there is an identify- 
ing circumstantiality infinitely stronger than posi- 
tive testimony, that demonstrates the sanity and 
truth of these utterances. Recall what the woman 
said to Edwin on this afternoon of December 24th; 
how, when he told her his name was Edwin, she 
said, "Is the short of that name Eddy, and don't 
sweethearts call it so?" And here note that Rosa 
Bud, alone, called him "Eddy." 

Again, Princess Puffer said, "You should be 
thankful your name ain't Ned." "Why?" "Because 
that is a bad name just now — a threatened name — 
a dangerous name." "Threatened men live long," 
he answered. "Then you, Deary, even while I am 
speaking to you, should live to all eternity." Gen- 
tlemen, there could be but one meaning to that 
warning — that he, whose name was Ned, was in 
imminent danger of death. The hand of death was 
upon him — upon Ned. And, mark you, the one man 
in all the world who called Edwin Drood "Ned," 
was John Jasper. And that night, Ned was mur- 
dered. Don't you see that there is a sequence, a 
chain of events and identifying circumstances — an 
interlinking of the foretelling and doing of this 
crime — a circumstantiality about the whole matter 
that demonstrates that John Jasper's tongue alone 
uttered the threats, and his hand alone did the deed. 
Truly, "Of our vices, the gods make instruments to 
plague us"; aye, and whatever the mystery, the 

131 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

eternal "Truth is mighty, and will prevail." But the 
incriminating evidence accumulates. 

It piles up, Pelion on Ossa. It is the evening of 
December 27th, two days after the disappearance of 
Edwin Drood. 

Jasper has publicly accused Neville of murder, 
resulting in his arrest. He has had his hearing and 
has been detained by Mayor Sapsea. The banks of 
the river have been searched by Jasper and others, 
for two days, for evidence of the crime. At this 
juncture, Grewgious comes to tell Jasper that the 
engagement had been broken; and when he reveals 
it, mark you what happened : This defendant rises 
from his chair, ghastly pale, with dreadful drops — 
as of steel — bursting upon his brow. He shrieks, 
tears his hair, writhes in agony, swoons, and falls — 
a mass of miry clothes — upon the floor. 

Gentlemen, I say to you that that conduct is abso- 
lutely inconsistent with innocence — inexplicable 
upon any theory of innocence — and everlastingly 
stamps upon his brow the indelible brand of guilt. 
It was in truth, the realization that the foul murder 
which he had committed, had been vain and useless ; 
and, arch-criminal though he was, the suddenness 
of the news unnerved and overcame him. Thus, 
deadly in its incrimination, you have witnessed the 
vain and lamentable effort at explanation, i.e., that 
Jasper, upon hearing of the broken engagement, was 
suddenly brought to a realization that the "air- 
castles" he had built for his boy, were shatered, 
and hence, in his exhausted condition, he was over- 
come and swooned? Gentlemen, that explanation is 
an insult to your intelligence, for, when apprised 
of the broken engagement, the defendant could have 
entertained but two theories — either that Edwin had 
been murdered, or that he had disappeared. Con- 
sider each in turn. If Edwin had been murdered — 
as all Jasper's actions indicated — then Edwin had 

132 



SUMMING UP OF PROSECUTION 

passed to the Great Beyond where there is no mar- 
riage or giving in marriage. What booted it then 
that his earthly engagement of marriage had been 
broken? How could such news, according to any 
rule of reason or gauge of human conduct, have 
caused John Jasper to shriek in terror— tear his 
hair — writhe in agony — swoon — and fall, a miry 
mass, upon the floor? Again, if Edwin had dis- 
appeared, then the news must have meant a ray of 
hope ; and hence, if Jasper had given verbal expres- 
sion to his feeling, it would have been a sigh of 
relief, and not an agonizing shriek. Don't you see, 
therefore, that this shrieking, agonizing spectacle, 
consistently with innocence, is inexplicable upon 
either theory? Besides, the news meant to Jasper 
that the girl whom he madly loved, was free. And 
thus you see the attempted explanation indicts, in- 
criminates, convicts. The truth is, you can no more 
explain away this guilty conduct of John Jasper 
than you can blot the sun out of the firmament. 
You remember how Lady Macbeth seeks to wash 
the stain of guilt from off her hand. "Out, out, 
damned spot," she cries. "With all great Neptune's 
ocean, wash this blood clean from my hands." And 
she rubs and rubs and rubs. "No, this, my hand, 
will rather the multitudinous seas incarnadine, mak- 
ing the green one red." Even so here — this in- 
criminating conduct of the defendant is the damned 
spot that will not out, and it gives an indelible hue 
and stain of guilt to the whole case. 

And now, this explanation failing, you see the 
further defences fall one by one ; for weak and vain 
indeed is the attempt to make it appear that Neville 
Landless committed this crime. This an exploded 
theory — a twice-told tale. Why, if Neville Land- 
less is guilty, was he discharged in Cloisterham, 
with all the suspicions and prejudice against him — 
which you have heard here — when these were pre- 

133 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

sented before Mayor Sapsea, and who, you will 
recall, was dominated by this wily defendant? 
Don't you see that this is but an attempt to befog 
and becloud your mental vision and the real issue 
in this case by stale, discarded and discredited sus- 
picions and prejudices which were aroused and 
fomented by Jasper himself? But, if there be the 
semblance of a doubt in the minds of anyone of you 
as to the absolute innocence of Neville Landless, as 
he has testified here upon the stand, you have such 
admission of his innocence from the defendant him- 
self ; for you will recall the garden scene over the 
sun dial. The defendant begs Rosa to remove dan- 
ger from Neville Landless if she cares for his sister. 
Rosa asks Jasper whether he thinks Neville is guilty, 
and Jasper replies: "Circumstances may accumu- 
late so strongly even against an innocent man as to 
slay him." That admission, gentlemen, is so im- 
portant, that it is italicized in the record of this 
case. 

But again, our opponents will further say, "You 
have not proved that Edwin Drood was in fact 
murdered, and you have got to prove it beyond a 
reasonable doubt; he has only disappeared." Yes, 
gentlemen, we have got to prove it beyond a rea- 
sonable doubt, but not beyond a possible doubt. 
A possible doubt inheres in everything. There is 
a possible doubt that some of you may die before 
this trial is over, but that is not a reasonable doubt, 
you see. And similarly, there is no reasonable doubt 
that Edwin Drood was murdered. To begin, Edwin 
Drood was a truthful and honorable boy. He had 
received from Rosa's guardian, Grewgious, an en- 
gagement ring which had belonged to Rosa's dead 
mother. He received it upon a solemn trust to return 
it should the engagement be broken. And when the 
engagement was broken on the afternoon of Decem- 
ber 24th, he further promised Rosa to remain at 

134 



SUMMING UP OF PROSECUTION 

Cloisterham until Grewgious should come up to 
advise Jasper of the broken engagement, at which 
time Edwin purposed returning the ring. Both of 
these promises were broken, and it is unbelievable 
that Edwin Drood, if alive would have broken them. 

Again, referring to Jasper's incriminating con- 
duct, I have demonstrated to you that the shrieking, 
tearing of hair, writhing and swooning of this de- 
fendant, in the light of all the surrounding circum- 
stances, means, and only can mean, guilt. And if 
it is guilt, it is murder; it can be no other or less 
crime. But still further, gentlemen, mark you that 
this defendant, himself, has registered his own sol- 
emn verdict that Edwin Drood was, in fact, mur- 
dered. Turn to his diary, and what has he entered 
therein ? 

"My dear boy is murdered. The discovery of the 
watch and shirt-pin convinces me that he was mur- 
dered that night, and that his jewelry was taken 
from him to prevent identification by its means. 
All the delusive hopes I had founded on his separa- 
tion from his betrothed wife I give to the winds. 
They perish before this fatal discovery." (The 
discovery of the watch and pin in the river.) 

And still further, all the prisoner's assertions, 
acts and conducts, from time to time since that 
entry — his persistence in treating the disappearance 
as murder — his wearing of mourning — his reference 
in his last visit to Princess Puffer, to the death of 
his nephew — all corroborate and confirm the defend- 
ant's own verdict in his diary — that, "My dear boy 
was murdered." And, accepting this verdict, you 
will, of course, not be misled by any arguments of 
counsel about the ways and means by which the 
murder was committed. It may have been by 
strangulation with the black scarf; or, it may have 
been that the prisoner, during a post-midnight visit 
with Edwin to the top of the tower, suddenly hurled 

135 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

him off, into the abyss below, and then concealed 
his bodj 7- in one of the vaults, with quicklime as the 
destroying agency; the watch and pin, known by 
Jasper to be indestructible by quicklime having first 
been removed from the boy's person and later cast 
into the river to divert suspicion. But all this is 
really useless discussion; for, Edwin Drood, having 
been, in fact, murdered, as has been proved beyond 
a reasonable doubt, it follows that such discussion 
as to ways and means, is immaterial, inconsequen- 
tial, and to no purpose. 

But again, and finally, gentlemen, remember that 
six months after this crime John Jasper once more 
visits the Princess Puffer. You will recall her testi- 
mony and study the record of that visit with 
scrutinizing care. You will learn from it that the 
Princess had been conversing with him about his 
former visits, and that he then lapsed into silence — 
thinking, ruminating upon the past. He is not under 
the influence of the drug, mark you, for he has 
inhaled but a "few whiffs"; but still, he becomes 
dreamy, seems to forget her presence, until she 
quietly and gently recalls his attention to her again. 
And then he says to her, "I was only thinking" — 
"thinking," he explains, about something he "had 
upon his mind" — something (having reference to 
the past) that he was "going to do." And then 
later, he asserts that "it was really done," and he 
likens the "subject in my (his) mind" to a "journey 
with a fellow traveler"— "a difficult and dangerous 
journey"— "a hazardous and perilous journey over 
abysses where a slip would be destruction"; and 
finally, he declares, "the journey's made"— "it is 
over" — "no struggle" — "no consciousness of peril" 
— "no entreaty." Have you the slightest doubt as 
to the meaning of all this — the self-incrimination — 
the guilt it bespeaks and records? Yes, gentlemen, 
the journey's made — it's over — Ned was murdered. 

136 



SUMMING UP OF PROSECUTION 

And, under all the evidence, that vile hypocrite and 
arch-fiend — that incarnation of hell — did the deed. 
Not only the essential items of circumstantial evi- 
dence to which I have called your attention, "infin- 
itely stronger" than positive testimony, lead inevi- 
tably, step by step, to the conclusion that Edwin 
Drood was murdered and that John Jasper was his 
murderer, but the whole intendment of the story, 
as disclosed in the entire record (the book) confirms 
and establishes the conclusion beyond a reasonable 
doubt. Gentlemen, the eyes of all the world are 
upon you. Do your duty under the law, human and 
divine — the law of this Commonwealth, of England, 
and of Heaven! Render your verdict — "GUILTY 
OF MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE." 



The Court : It is now eleven o'clock. The Court 
will take a few minutes recess. Those who cannot 
remain until the close of the trial, will take the 
opportunity now. 

You should remember that this is the first time 
that a case of this character has been tried in an 
American Court. Why not give up at least one 
evening to the trial of a literary question? 

The Court will now take a recess of five minutes, 
after which the Court will charge the jury, and then 
their verdict will be rendered. 



(Five minutes recess.) 



137 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Court Clerk: Silence! The Court has recon- 
vened. 

CHARGE OF THE COURT. 
Elkin, P. J. 

Gentlemen of the jury: 

You have been chosen from a select body of 
veniremen to perform a duty, unusual in its char- 
acter and more than ordinarily interesting in its 
nature. It is the desire of the Court to aid you in 
the performance of that duty by giving such in- 
structions as may serve to guide your deliberations. 
John Jasper stands at the bar of the Court charged 
with the murder of his nephew, Edwin Drood. Mur- 
der is the most atrocious crime known to the law; 
it implies a wicked heart, a malicious mind, an evil 
intent and a wanton disposition. Human and divine 
law cry out against the commission of such a crime. 
The murderer, like the red-handed bandit, or the 
marauding brigand, is a challenge to civilization, 
and hence it is that the law demands as a protection 
to organized society, when one is convicted of un- 
lawfully taking the life of his fellow man, he shall 
be made answerable for his crime even to the giving 
up of his own life. Life is dear to every one, and 
the right to enjoy and defend it is a blessing vouch- 
safed to us by the struggles and sacrifices of those 
who battled their way to freedom and liberty 
throughout the generations of men. The higher the 
civilization, the greater is the protection afforded 
the life, liberty and property of the individual. The 
right to enjoy and defend life and liberty is funda- 
mental to the whole system of Anglo-Saxon juris- 
prudence, and hence it has come to be the settled 
law, that no man shall be deprived of these inde- 
feasible rights without a trial by a jury of his peers 
according to the law of the land, with a full oppor- 
tunity to be heard in a lawfully constituted court. 

138 




Mr. Justice Elk in 
who presided at the trial 



CHARGE OF THE COURT 

When a crime is charged, the accused is presumed 
to be innocent until proven guilty. This is the law 
of Pennsylvania, and as applied to the present case, 
it means that John Jasper, the accused, charged 
with the crime of murder, is presumed to be inno- 
cent until the Commonwealth produces testimony 
satisfactory to your minds that he is guilty beyond 
a reasonable doubt. 

The case is extraordinary and unusual. It is the 
first time an American jury has been called upon 
to try such a case. You may consider yourselves 
complimented and honored in being selected from 
a panel of the most intelligent and highly respected 
citizens of Philadelphia to determine a question 
which for more than a generation has been dis- 
cussed without reaching a conclusion by the ablest 
and most learned scholars of Great Britain. The 
attempt was made on the other side a few months 
ago to solve the Mystery of Edwin Drood by the 
trial of John Jasper in an English court. What was 
evidently intended to be a serious trial before a 
jury of English scholars developed into a burlesque, 
with the result that the mystery is still unsolved 
and nothing of value was suggested as an aid to its 
solution. Hence it was that the Dickens Fellowship 
of Philadelphia determined to have the case tried on 
American soil and in a Pennsylvania court. Inas- 
much as the crime was committed in England, if 
committed at all, it was deemed advisable that the 
court should be presided over by an English judge, 
and that counsel should appear in the role of English 
barristers, but that the trial should be conducted 
according to the law of our own State. The right 
of trial by a jury of the vicinage and in the juris- 
diction of the crime has been waived, and it is 
agreed that what is known in law as the corpus 
delicti may be established by inferences from facts 
and circumstances like any other fact in the case. 

139 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

In the prisoner's dock sits John Jasper charged 
with the murder of Edwin Drood. Is he guilty or 
not guilty? Your verdict must answer the question. 
It is your duty, without fear or favor, without in- 
terest or bias, without impulse or emotion, to care- 
fully consider all the testimony adduced in your 
hearing, or contained in the record admitted in evi- 
dence, giving to the established facts their due 
weight according to your human experience, and 
then be guided by your deliberate judgment in de- 
ciding the guilt or innocence of the accused. 

The record, the last book written by Dickens, by 
agreement of counsel, is in evidence. You have the 
right under the law to consider in your deliberations 
the facts thus proved. What does the record dis- 
close and how have these facts been emphasized or 
explained by the witnesses produced at the trial, or 
by the learned counsel on both sides who have just 
addressed you? What is the story about and why 
should the lovers of Dickens and the students of 
literature in England and America be interested in 
solving this strange mystery? The mystery of 
Edwin Drood was the last book written by Charles 
Dickens. The author evidently intended this to be 
his greatest work. It was published in serial form 
from time to time as written, but it was never fin- 
ished. With pen in hand, the great novelist, who 
has interested and amused the peoples of two hem- 
ispheres for half a century, sat in his chalet during 
the afternoon of his last day of consciousness, and 
wrote what we must consider his final words: "and 
then falls to with an appetite." His task was un- 
completed and he passed from hence with the secret 
of the mystery carefully guarded in his own breast. 

The author chose the quaint old town of Cloister- 
ham, in the county of Kent, with its ancient Cathe- 
dral, its tower, its crypt, gate house, minor canon 
corner, and other lodgings and structures, as the 

140 



CHARGE OF THE COURT 

habitat of his characters and the place to which 
they had occasion to resort. His mental conceptions 
represent a wonderful observation of character and 
show a strange insight into the tragic secrets of the 
human heart. He told the story of life as it is, and 
not as we might wish it to be. 

In the consideration of this case you must keep 
in mind the precise question to be determined. The 
guilt or innocence of the accused is the question sub- 
mitted for your decision, but this fact is to be estab- 
lished upon the basis of what the author intended. 
The important question therefore is the intention 
of the author, and this intention depends upon the 
inferences to be drawn from the facts and circum- 
stances recorded in the book which has been offered 
in evidence. Did Dickens intend that Edwin Drood 
should be murdered by John Jasper, and if so, was 
the murder committed in the early hours of Christ- 
mas Day, 1851, when Edwin Drood disappeared, 
and since which time no one has ever seen him? It 
is apparent that the author intended to develop sev- 
eral distinct types of English life, and in portraying 
his characters to tell the story of real life with its 
joys, its pleasures, its compensations, its trials and 
its tragedies. A hasty glance at some of the leading 
characters may aid in giving you the atmosphere of 
the case and be helpful in arriving at a just verdict. 
There is the superficial, pompous, conceited, vain- 
glorious and self-sufficient Mr. Sapsea, auctioneer 
and mayor, but withal a useful citizen. We must 
not overlook Durdles, the stone mason, illiterate, 
given to drunkenness, slovenly in his habits, indif- 
ferent to appearances, but hard-headed and crafty, 
with a thorough knowledge of the subterranean re- 
cesses of the crypt, the passageways to the tower, 
and a natural instinct for devining the secret 
thoughts of men no matter how they may try to hide 
their real purposes behind the gloss of words and 

141 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

garb of respectability. Mr. Crisparkle, minor 
canon, "fair and rosy, early riser, musical, classical, 
cheerful, kind, good natured, social, contented and 
boy like," is one of the most interesting characters 
in the story. It was his nature to do kindly things, 
to be helpful to those in need, to strew the pathway 
of life with roses, to believe in his fellow man, and 
to have faith in the nobler qualities of the human 
heart. Grewgious, an English solicitor, the guar- 
dian of Rosa Bud, was an "angular" man, honest 
and faithful, true to every trust reposed in him, 
and fidelity itself in every fiduciary relation. Neville 
Landless was lithe and handsome, dark and rich in 
color, undisciplined and inclined to chafe under re- 
straint, but strong, resolute, brave, quick to resent 
an insult, and courageous enough to defend what 
he conceived to be his rights under all circum- 
stances. The character of Tartar is not fully devel- 
oped, but enough has been told of the "powerful and 
sunburnt sailor" to show that he had the manly 
qualities of a gentleman, the patriotic spirit of the 
best type of his race, and the gallantry which springs 
from a brave heart in protecting and defending 
noble womanhood. Edwin Drood, as he says of him- 
self, was "a surface kind of a fellow" with "a head- 
piece none of the best." He was young, rather fair 
to look upon, trained to some extent as an engineer, 
with a vague pride in the possible triumphs of en- 
gineering skill in the land of the pyramids. His 
father and Rosa Bud's father intended that these 
children of their affection should in their mature 
years be united in the holy bonds of matrimony. 
This testamentary disposition of fond parents ig- 
nored the law of natural selection, with the usual 
result — no marriage and sometimes tragic conse- 
quences. Rosa Bud was "wonderfully pretty, won- 
derfully childish and wonderfully whimsical." She 
was fair and beautiful, with tender affections and 

142 



CHARGE OF THE COURT 

childish emotions, but true to the impulses of her 
own heart and resentful of any unwarranted in- 
trusion upon the sacred prerogatives of a woman's 
love. Helena Landless was as beautiful as Cleo- 
patra, and when occasion demanded it, as spirited 
and commanding as Maria Theresa at the head of 
an Austrian army. She emerged from the disad- 
vantages of her early life as erect, stately and im- 
posing as a Cathedral tower. Adverse conditions 
did not subdue her spirit, and when fight was pro- 
posed to escape from the miserable conditions of 
her childhood, it was "always of her planning and 
leading"; in these attempts she "dressed as a boy 
and showed the daring of a man." She was strong, 
capable, aggressive, resolute, high minded, tender, 
devoted to her brother, uncompromising where 
honor was involved and unflinching in the face of 
danger. She had the affection of a sister, the love 
of a woman, the devotion of a true friend, the 
strength of a man and the courage of a noble spirit. 
And what of the mysterious Datchery? Of him 
but little is known, and not enough has been told 
by the author to definitely indicate who he was or 
what part he was to play in solving the mystery. 
For the purposes of this trial it is of no importance 
to speculate upon the intentions of the author in 
respect to this character, but as a suggestion to the 
readers of Dickens, and without any intention to 
influence the jury, who are directed to disregard 
what is now said, the court expresses its belief that 
when Datchery has thrown aside the disguises which 
conceal the real person, underneath them, will be 
found the beautiful hair, the finely chiseled features, 
the graceful form, the brave heart and the noble 
soul of Helena Landless. And if this be true, why 
should not such a splendid type of womanhood be 
the wife of the good Mr. Crisparkle. John Jasper 
was, "impassive, moody, solitary, resolute, so con- 

143 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

centrated on one idea, and on its attendant fixed 
purposes, that he would share it with no fellow 
creature, he lived apart from human life." He was 
the precentor of the musical services in the Cathe- 
dral, and in Cloisterham was looked upon as a man 
of good reputation. He was educated, musical, ac- 
complished and so far as appearances went, a man 
with correct ideals of life. But in London he was 
the patron of the Princess Puffer, the frequenter 
of the opium den, where he consorted with the low 
and vicious, and thus demonstrated the dual char- 
acter of his life. Although he may have had a dual 
nature, this is not sufficient to convict him of the 
crime of murder. Evil minded men are not neces- 
sarily murderers. The commonwealth, however, 
contends that he had a motive for killing his neph- 
ew, and that having the motive, he had the evil 
mind and wicked heart to commit the crime. It is 
further contended that he was in love with Rosa 
Bud, and although her musical instructor, could not 
conceal from his pupil the intensity of his passion ; 
that he belonged to the type of men who do not 
hesitate to batter down all obstacles in order to ac- 
complish what their selfish natures desire ; that Ed- 
win Drood was betrothed to Rosa Bud, and John 
Jasper believed the intended marriage would take 
place; that with the marriage consummated he 
would be thwarted in his selfish purposes ; and that 
with this situation confronting him when the parties 
met in Cloisterham to reconcile differences and to 
announce the engagement of these young people, 
he grew desperate and killed his nephew to prevent 
the marriage. 

You know the rest of the story, the sudden disap- 
pearance of Edwin Drood, as if spirited away no 
one knew where nor could anyone explain the 
strange circumstances, the excitement in the old 
cathedral town, the feverish anxiety of the people 

144 



CHARGE OF THE COURT 

and the strange misgivings of all concerned. After 
that night no one ever saw Edwin Drood; he dis- 
appeared from the face of the earth so far as the 
testimony discloses. How, when and why? It is 
for you, gentlemen of the jury, to determine these 
questions. What are the clues? You have heard 
the theories of the commonwealth and of the de- 
fence, and you will give these theories such weight 
as in your judgment they deserve. What signifi- 
cance is to be attached to the finding of the watch 
and pin of Edwin Drood in the weir? How came 
they there? Was it by accident or design? Were 
they cast away by the owner or mislaid by him, or 
were they thrown into the water by the murderer 
to conceal the evidence of his crime? Then, too, 
there was the nocturnal visit of John Jasper with 
Durdles to the crypt and tower a short time before 
the disappearance of Edwin Drood. How do you 
explain this strange search in the night time, while 
others slept, and what motive could the prisoner 
have had in making such an investigation in the 
dark, damp and gruesome resting place of the dead ? 
The commonwealth points to a number of suspicious 
circumstances from which it is contended the guilt 
of the accused may be inferred. In this connection 
the learned counsel for the prosecution have directed 
your attention to the anger manifested by Jasper 
towards the boy, Deputy; to the scene in the lodg- 
ings of Jasper when Grewgious called to make 
inquiry after the strange disappearance of Edwin 
Drood ; to the profession of love by Jasper to Rosa 
Bud when he was supposed to be sorely grieved by 
the loss of his favorite nephew; to the strange say- 
ings and mysterious suggestions, indicating a dis- 
turbed mind, a conscience stricken spirit and a tor- 
tured soul, made by Jasper as he went under the 
influence of the opium furnished by the Princess 
Puffer; to the ring; to the quicklime; and to many 

145 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

other acts and declarations of the prisoner; all of 
which are intended to suggest suspicious circum- 
stances from which the jury may be permitted to 
draw the inference of guilt. It is proper for the 
jury to give these facts and circumstances and the 
inferences to be drawn therefrom, due consideration 
in determining the intention of the author as to the 
guilt or innocence of the accused. 

I have thus far addressed you upon the theory of 
the commonwealth, but this is only one side of the 
case. It is my duty, as it is yours, to give full 
consideration to the defences insisted upon by 
learned counsel who appear for the prisoner. It is 
contended with much force that the commonwealth 
has failed to make out a case; that Edwin Drood 
may not have been murdered at all ; or if murdered, 
that the crime may have been committed by some- 
one other than the prisoner at the bar. It is argued 
that all the facts and circumstances relied on by the 
commonwealth to ask a conviction are just as con- 
sistent with the innocence of John Jasper as that 
they are an indication of his guilt. The defence 
also points to the fact that John Jasper was vigi- 
lant and untiring in his efforts to discover the 
perpetrator of the crime, and it is argued that the 
whole attitude of the prisoner after the disappear- 
ance of Edwin Drood is inconsistent with the theory 
of guilt on his own part. It is proper to make this 
contention and it is your duty to give it due con- 
sideration, but the answer must of necessity depend 
upon your ascertainment of the fact whether the 
prisoner acted in good faith, and with a sincere 
purpose, or whether his actions were a mere cloak 
to conceal his own guilt by an attempt to point the 
finger of suspicion at someone else. You must be 
the judge of the good faith of his motives and the 
sincerity of his purpose, being guided by the evi- 
dence in the case. 

146 



CHARGE OF THE COURT 

The defence also relies upon the well settled law 
that the guilt of the accused must be established 
beyond a reasonable doubt. The law in its humanity 
resolves all doubts in favor of the accused in a crim- 
inal case. This reasonable doubt must not be a 
whimsical, arbitrary, or speculative doubt, nor a 
mere conjecture or guess, but one which rests upon 
a reasonable foundation. It must be such a doubt 
as honest, conscientious, commonsense men enter- 
tain upon the facts and circumstances of the case. 
It must not represent a mere skeptical condition of 
mind, or hesitation to perform an unpleasant duty, 
or an unwillingness to draw a conclusion which may 
result in depriving the accused of his life or liberty. 
You must consider all the facts and circumstances, 
being guided by your experience and judgment as 
men, and then say whether the accused is guilty of 
the crime with which he stands charged beyond a 
reasonable doubt. In this connection the defence 
has introduced some evidence of good character, 
which, under the law of Pennsylvania is always ad- 
missible in a criminal case, and it is to be weighed 
and considered by the jury in connection with all 
the evidence in determining the guilt or innocence 
of the accused. Indeed, it has been held in a num- 
ber of our cases that evidence of good character may 
of itself create the reasonable doubt which will en- 
title the accused to an acquittal. You should con- 
sider the evidence of good character in connection 
with all the other evidence in the case, and then 
determine from all the evidence, including that of 
good character, whether the accused is guilty be- 
yond a reasonable doubt. 

The prisoner has taken the stand as a witness 
in his own behalf and this he has the right to do 
under the law. Seven centuries have passed since 
the English barons forced the Magna Charta from 
the unwilling hands of King John on the grassy 

147 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

slopes of Runnymede, and since that time no man 
in England or the United States can be deprived of 
his life or liberty without a trial by a jury of his 
peers and an opportunity to appear and be heard in 
his own defence. This is an indefeasible right guar- 
anteed by the organic law of Pennsylvania and the 
accused has availed himself of the right. While all 
this is true, you are not absolutely bound by the 
explanation of the prisoner, but it is your duty to 
give his testimony such consideration as in your 
judgment it is entitled to, keeping in mind his in- 
terest, the probabilities of his story, and all the 
evidence in the case. The credibility of the witness 
is entirely for the jury. 

In your consideration of this case it is important 
to keep in mind, that the purpose of the trial is to 
discover the intention of the author in solving the 
Mystery of Edwin Drood, and hence the necessity 
of making this intention the turning point of the 
case in passing upon the guilt or innocence of the 
accused. It is the desire of the Dickens Fellowship 
of this city, as it is of the Court, that the jurors 
should give serious consideration to the solution of 
this mystery so that the verdict may be accepted as 
a result of your deliberate judgment upon the ques- 
tion involved. 

Under our criminal code murder is of two degrees, 
the first and second, and for the purposes of the 
present trial, both sides agree, that your inquiry 
may be limited to a determination of the fact 
whether the prisoner at the bar is guilty of murder 
of the first degree, or of the second degree, or not 
guilty at all. We will therefore limit our instruc- 
tions to what constitutes murder of the first degree 
and murder of the second degree. Murder of the 
first degree is the wilful, deliberate and premedi- 
tated killing of another with intent to take life. 
Murder of the second degree is the felonious and 

148 



CHARGE OF THE COURT 

malicious killing of another, but without the specific 
intent to take life. There can be no conviction of 
murder of the first degree unless there be delibera- 
tion and premeditation with intent to take life be- 
fore the killing. In every homicide case the pre- 
sumption is no higher than that the accused is guilty 
of murder of the second degree, and if a conviction 
of murder of the first degree is insisted upon, the 
burden is on the Commonwealth to establish the 
facts necessary to show deliberation and premedi- 
tation with intent to take life. The duty of fixing 
the degree of murder belongs exclusively to the jury 
under the law of Pennsylvania, and we leave the 
performance of that duty to you. If the evidence 
satisfies your mind beyond a reasonable doubt that 
Edwin Drood was killed, and that the killing was 
the wilful, deliberate and premeditated act of the 
accused with intent to take life, you would be war- 
ranted in returning a verdict of murder of the first 
degree. If, on the other hand, you find from the 
evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the pris- 
oner feloniously and maliciously killed Edwin Drood, 
but without the formed purpose and the specific 
intent to take his life prior to the killing, you would 
be warranted in returning a verdict of murder of 
the second degree. If the evidence does not satisfy 
your minds beyond a reasonable doubt, that the pris- 
oner committed the crime charged, you need give 
yourselves no concern about the degree of murder, 
but should return a verdict of not guilty. 

The case is now submitted for your careful con- 
sideration. You have heard the evidence, the argu- 
ment of able counsel on both sides, the charge of 
the Court, and it remains for you, gentlemen of the 
jury, to say by your verdict whether the prisoner 
at the bar is guilty or innocent of the crime charged, 
and if guilty, the degree of the murder. 

You will now retire in charge of an officer of the 
149 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Court, and when you have agreed upon a verdict, 
you will return so that the result of your delibera- 
tions may be recorded in open court. 

Court Clerk : The tipstaves will retire with the 
jurors, and see that they are not in communication 
with any persons excepting themselves during their 
retirement. 

The Court : The Court will now take a recess for 
five minutes. 



(Recess for five minutes.) 



The Court: The Court will be in order. 

Court Clerk: Gentlemen of the jury, have you 
agreed upon a verdict. The foreman will please 
stand up. 

Foreman of Jury: We have. 

Court Clerk: During the rendition of the ver- 
dict, the jurors will stand and remain standing until 
the same is duly recorded and officially announced. 
How say you? 

Foreman of Jury: Not guilty. 

(Applause.) 

Judge Patterson: We ask that the jury be 
polled. 

The Court : The crier will call the names of the 
jurors. As their names are called, they will arise 
in their places and announce the verdict. 

Mr. Scott : I would suggest that it be announced 
as to what ruling has been adopted on the part of 
the decision of the jury; that we are not bound by 
the present law of Pennsylvania. 

The Court: I think they have the right to poll 
the jury under the law. 

Mr. Scott : I withdraw the motion. 

150 




The Tipstaves 
Walter S. Wheeler Arthur L. Wheeler 



VERDICT AND POLL OF JURY 

Court Clerk: John B. McMaster, how say you, 
guilty or not guilty? 

Mr. John B. McMasteR: Not guilty. 

Court Clerk: George W. Elkins, how say you, 
guilty or not guilty? 

Mr. George W. Elkins : Not guilty. 

Court Clerk: James W. King, how say you, 
guilty or not guilty? 

Mr. James W. King: Not guilty. 

Court Clerk : A. G. Hetherington, how say you, 
guilty or not guilty? 

Mr. A. G. Hetherington: Not guilty. 

Court Clerk: William Findlay Brown, how say 
you, guilty or not guilty? 

Mr. William Findlay Brown : Not guilty. 

Court Clerk: Rudolph Blankenburg, how say 
you, guilty or not guilty? 

Honorable Rudolph Blankenburg: Not guilty. 

Court Clerk: Edgar F. Smith, how say you, 
guilty or not guilty? 

Mr. Edgar F. Smith: Not guilty. 

Court Clerk: George Wharton Pepper, how say 
you, guilty or not guilty? 

Mr. George Wharton Pepper: Not guilty. 

Court Clerk: Samuel W. Pennypacker, how say 
you, guilty or not guilty? 

Honorable Samuel W. Pennypacker: Not 
guilty. 

Court Clerk: J. Parker Norris, how say you, 
guilty or not guilty? 

Mr. J. Parker Norris: Not guilty. 

Court Clerk : Charlemagne Tower, how say you, 
guilty or not guilty? 

Mr. Charlemagne Tower: Not guilty. 
151 



TRIAL OF JOHN JASPER 

Court Clerk: J. William White, how say you, 
guilty or not guilty? 

Dr. J. William White : Guilty. (Applause.) 

Court Clerk: Gentlemen of the jury, hearken 
unto your verdict as the Court hath recorded it. 
You say you find the prisoner at the bar, John 
Jasper, not guilty of the murder for which he stands 
indicted, and so say a majority of you. 

Mr. Scott : I move the discharge of the prisoner, 
John Jasper. 

The Court: John Jasper, you have been tried 
before a jury of your peers, charged with the crime 
of murder. You have been ably defended by coun- 
sel. The prosecution representing the Common- 
wealth, has pressed its suit for conviction. The jury 
selected represent the most intelligent citizens 
of Philadelphia. You are an Englishman. You 
have been brought to Pennsylvania for trial. You 
can thank yourself that the law of Pennsylvania 
protects the rights of Englishmen, as it does her 
own citizens. Here the law protects the rights of 
every man, no matter what his nationality may be. 
You are now excused. 

I also desire to extend my thanks to the jurors 
for their attendance upon the Court, and their care- 
ful attention to this case. 

You are excused, with the thanks of the Court. 

Court Clerk: The Court is now adjourned. 




' That monster whom the Theban knight 

Made kill herself for very heart's despite 
That he had read her riddle, which no wight 
Could ever loose, but suffered deadly doole. ' ' 

Spenser's "Faerie Queen," Bk. v. cxi. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: March 2009 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN COLLECTIONS PRESERVATION 

111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 1 6066 
(724)779-2111 



